CISM Information Security Programme Practice Question
An organization is defining objectives and key results (OKRs) for the security program. Which TWO of the following are examples of leading indicators that could be used as key results?
⚠ Common exam trap
CISM often tests the leading vs. lagging distinction — candidates incorrectly select incident counts or MTTR because they sound like security metrics, missing that key results should predict, not report, outcomes.
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
✓
Phishing click rate
B (Phishing click rate) is a leading indicator because it measures a precursor behavior — how often users fall for simulated phishing — that predicts the likelihood of future successful credential-theft or malware incidents, and it can be driven down through training before any breach occurs. E (Patch compliance percentage) is also leading because it quantifies the proportion of systems with current patches, directly reducing exploitable vulnerabilities and thus the probability of future compromise. By contrast, A (Number of security incidents), C (MTTR), and D (Number of data breaches) are lagging indicators: they record events or outcomes that have already happened (incidents, breaches) or measure post-event response speed (MTTR), so they reflect past performance rather than predicting future risk.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Number of security incidents
Why it's wrong here
Incident counts are lagging: they record harm already realised, so they cannot predict future security performance. They are tempting because they are easy to collect and track. A leading key result would instead measure preventive activity, such as percentage of assets covered by vulnerability remediation within SLA.
- ✓
Phishing click rate
Why this is correct
Phishing click rate is a leading indicator: it measures employee susceptibility before an actual breach occurs, predicting future incident likelihood. This satisfies the stem's requirement for key results that forecast outcomes rather than report past events.
- ✗
Mean time to respond (MTTR)
Why it's wrong here
MTTR is lagging: it measures how quickly the team reacted after an incident already occurred, so it reports past response performance rather than predicting future risk reduction. It is tempting because it is quantifiable and operationally visible. A leading key result would measure preventive capability, such as patch coverage.
- ✗
Number of data breaches
Why it's wrong here
A data breach count is a lagging indicator: it records incidents that already occurred, so it cannot forecast future security posture. Leading indicators measure preventive activity, such as patch coverage or training completion. Breach counts belong in outcome reporting, not forward-looking key results.
- ✓
Patch compliance percentage
Why this is correct
Patch compliance percentage is a leading indicator, measuring the proportion of systems current with security updates and thereby predicting exposure to exploitation. It satisfies the stem's requirement by forecasting future risk rather than reporting incidents that already happened.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This CISM question is part of Courseiva's 924-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 →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official ISACA exam blueprint
This CISM 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 CISM exam.