CISM Information Security Programme Practice Question
An organization wants to measure the effectiveness of its security awareness programme. Which metric is a leading indicator of improved security culture?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap is that candidates might choose training completion or test scores as indicators of awareness, but these are compliance or knowledge metrics, not leading indicators of culture change; the exam tests understanding of leading vs. lagging indicators.
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
✓
Number of phishing emails reported by employees
A leading indicator measures activities or behaviors that predict future outcomes. The number of phishing emails reported by employees is a leading indicator because it reflects increased security awareness and vigilance; employees are actively identifying and reporting suspicious emails, which can prevent incidents. This indicates a positive shift in security culture.
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 attributed to human error
Why it's wrong here
Human-error incidents are lagging indicators: they record harm already realised, so they cannot predict improving culture. The metric is tempting because incident counts are readily available and intuitively tied to awareness, but a leading indicator must measure behaviour or reporting activity before incidents occur.
- ✓
Number of phishing emails reported by employees
Why this is correct
The number of phishing emails reported by employees is a leading indicator because rising reporting demonstrates heightened vigilance and engagement, predicting improved culture before incidents decline. This satisfies the stem's requirement for a predictive metric, distinguishing proactive employee behaviour from lagging outcomes such as breach counts.
- ✗
Percentage of employees who completed annual training
Why it's wrong here
Completion percentage measures attendance at training, not whether behaviour or culture changed, so it is an activity metric rather than a leading indicator of improvement. It is tempting because completion is easy to track, but mandatory attendance can be high while risky behaviour persists.
- ✗
Average score on knowledge assessment tests
Why it's wrong here
Assessment scores measure knowledge retention immediately after training, not the attitudes, reporting habits or behaviours that signal cultural improvement. It is tempting because scores are quantifiable and comparable, but knowing a policy does not demonstrate that employees apply or value it.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 924 original CISM practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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.