mediumMultiple Choice
CRISC Practice Question: During a risk identification workshop, the…
During a risk identification workshop, the business process owner states that a key system has no documented dependencies. What is the BEST next step for the risk practitioner?
⚠ Common exam trap
A common mix-up: candidates think the immediate priority is to gather the missing data (Option A) or halt the workshop (Option B), rather than recognizing that the risk practitioner's first duty is to formally record the identified gap as a risk to ensure it is tracked and managed.
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
✓
Document the missing dependency information as a risk in the risk register
Undocumented dependencies represent an unknown risk that must be captured in the risk register to ensure visibility and subsequent analysis. By documenting the missing dependency information as a risk, the risk practitioner formally acknowledges the gap, enabling further investigation into potential single points of failure, cascading failures, or unmonitored interconnections that could impact system availability or integrity.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Ask the system administrator to provide a list after the workshop
Why it's wrong here
Deferring collection to the administrator after the workshop leaves the dependency gap unresolved during the session, so the risk register is built on incomplete input. Administrator-held records are useful for later validation, but the practitioner should elicit dependencies from participants while the process owner is present.
- ✗
Postpone the workshop until dependencies are mapped
Why it's wrong here
Postponing halts the risk identification exercise and delivers no output, when undocumented dependencies can be elicited directly from workshop participants. Deferral suits cases where critical attendees or data are genuinely unavailable, not where the owner can be questioned immediately about upstream and downstream systems.
- ✗
Assume the system has no dependencies
Why it's wrong here
Assuming no dependencies fabricates an input and understates likelihood and impact, corrupting every downstream risk assessment. Absence of documentation is not evidence of absence; assuming none is only defensible for an isolated system already proven to have no interfaces, which the owner has not established.
- ✓
Document the missing dependency information as a risk in the risk register
Why this is correct
Recording the undocumented dependencies in the risk register captures the uncertainty as an identified risk, satisfying the workshop's objective of risk identification. This preserves the gap for later assessment and treatment, rather than resolving it prematurely through interviews or technical discovery, which belong to risk analysis or response activities.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CRISC question from scratch — 1,062 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 CRISC 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 CRISC exam.