Risk & Compliance · RC-Q03

Question: Does the risk register capture inherent, residual, and target risk levels with mitigation owners?

Objective — Why This Matters

A register is more than a list — it is the audit trail of decisions. Capturing inherent, residual, and target states shows whether treatments are effective and when acceptance is justified. Ownership creates accountability, which drives closure.

Maturity Levels (0–5)

0 — Unaware
No central risk register.
1 — Ad Hoc
Register exists but fields are inconsistent; owners unclear.
2 — Defined
Template with inherent/residual fields; owners recorded; review dates set.
3 — Managed
Target state defined; treatments linked to tasks; periodic review occurs.
4 — Integrated
KPIs trend residual vs target; escalations auto-trigger for overdue items.
5 — Optimized
Analytics prioritize high exposure; repeat risks drive control improvements.

How to Level Up

From → To Actions
0 → 1 Stand up a single register with minimal fields (title, owner, due date).
1 → 2 Add inherent/residual scoring, review date, and treatment plan field.
2 → 3 Define target risk and acceptance criteria; link to action tracker (tickets).
3 → 4 Automate reminders/escalations; publish a monthly dashboard to leadership.
4 → 5 Analyze recurring themes; convert into control enhancements and budget asks.

People / Process / Technology Enablers

Evidence Required

Metrics / KPIs

Low-Cost / Open-Source Options (MSME)

Purpose Tool Notes
Register Google Sheets / Airtable Lock columns; use data validation for scoring.
Workflow GitHub Issues Labels for status; milestones for review dates.
BI Metabase Publish a monthly “Top Risks” dashboard.

Common Pitfalls

Compliance Mapping

Standard Clauses / Notes
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk identification, analysis, treatment records.
ISO/IEC 27001 Clause 6.1, 9.1 (monitoring and review).
NIST CSF 2.0 ID.RM-1/2 (risk management strategy & processes).
NIRMATA Scoring RC-Q03 Level ≥3 requires target state + linked treatments + periodic review.