hardMultiple Choice
CISM Practice Question: An organization's information security governance…
An organization's information security governance committee has not met for the past six months. Which of the following is the most significant risk associated with this situation?
⚠ Common exam trap
Watch out — candidates often confuse operational risks (like delayed incident response) with governance risks, failing to recognize that the committee's primary role is strategic oversight, not day-to-day operations.
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
✓
Lack of oversight leading to misalignment with business strategy
The governance committee's failure to meet for six months directly undermines the strategic alignment of security initiatives with business objectives. Without regular oversight, security investments and priorities may drift from the organization's risk appetite and strategic goals, leading to misallocation of resources and increased exposure to unmanaged risks. This misalignment is the most significant risk because it affects the entire security program's effectiveness and long-term viability.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Increased operational costs due to uncoordinated security investments
Why it's wrong here
Uncoordinated spending is a downstream symptom; the governance committee's absence removes oversight of risk appetite, strategy alignment and accountability, so security decisions proceed without mandated direction or escalation. Committees exist to steer strategy and monitor risk; they would be the right mechanism when investment prioritisation or policy approval is the issue.
- ✗
Regulatory fines from noncompliance
Why it's wrong here
Fines are a downstream consequence of governance failure, not the primary risk; the committee's absence means oversight, risk acceptance and strategic direction stop, so unmanaged risk accumulates unnoticed. It is tempting because penalties are tangible and quantifiable. Regulatory fines become the salient risk where a specific mandate is already breached.
- ✗
Delayed response to security incidents
Why it's wrong here
Incident response is an operational function run by security teams; the governance committee sets risk appetite, policy and oversight, so its absence does not directly delay containment or recovery. It is tempting because incidents feel urgent. Delayed response is the risk when operational escalation paths or on-call processes are missing.
- ✓
Lack of oversight leading to misalignment with business strategy
Why this is correct
Sustained absence of committee scrutiny removes the governance layer that aligns security investment with organisational objectives. Security decisions then default to operational or technical priorities, drifting from business strategy. This directly satisfies the stem's governance-failure scenario, where oversight is the control that preserves strategic alignment.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CISM question from scratch — 924 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
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.