Courseiva
Governance and Management of IThardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

CISA Governance and Management of IT Practice Question

A multinational corporation has defined its risk appetite as 'moderate' for IT investments. The IT steering committee is evaluating a new project with potential high returns but also significant cybersecurity risks. The project's risk profile is assessed as 'high' by the risk management team. What should the committee do FIRST?

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.

Correct answer & explanation

Request the project team to identify risk mitigation measures.

The correct first step. When a project's risk profile exceeds the defined risk appetite, the committee should not immediately reject or approve it. Instead, they should first explore whether risk mitigation measures can reduce the risk to an acceptable level. This aligns with governance best practices to balance risk and reward. Option B is premature without assessing mitigation. Option C escalates too early before considering mitigations. Option D rejects the opportunity without considering potential mitigation, which may discard valuable projects.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Request the project team to identify risk mitigation measures.

    Why this is correct

    Correct. The first step is to request the project team to identify risk mitigation measures that could bring the risk down to a moderate level, aligning with the risk appetite.

  • Approve the project but increase monitoring.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. Approving the project with increased monitoring without first exploring mitigation ignores the risk appetite and may expose the organization to unacceptable risk.

  • Escalate the decision to the board of directors.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. Escalation to the board should occur after the steering committee has evaluated mitigation options and determined the residual risk still exceeds appetite or requires board-level decision.

  • Reject the project immediately as it exceeds risk appetite.

    Why it's wrong here

    Incorrect. Rejecting immediately without considering mitigation may cause the organization to miss valuable opportunities that could be managed with appropriate controls.

About these practice questions

This CISA question is part of Courseiva's 995-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This CISA practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISACA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CISA exam.