Episode 57 — Monitor governance with leading indicators that reveal drift before failure (3A3)
This episode explains how to monitor governance using leading indicators that reveal drift early, so corrective action can happen before outages, compliance events, or major value shortfalls force reactive responses. You’ll learn the difference between lagging indicators, which confirm a problem after damage is done, and leading indicators, which show rising risk through patterns like increased exceptions, growing backlog of control evidence, delayed approvals, rising defect escape rates, unstable service changes, or repeated near-misses. We’ll cover how to choose indicators tied to governance objectives, assign ownership for monitoring, and set thresholds that trigger decision forums and remediation workflows. Real-world scenarios include dashboards that overemphasize uptime while ignoring change failure rate, governance committees that never review exception trends, and portfolio reporting that hides capacity overload until delivery collapses. On the CGEIT exam, strong answers typically emphasize monitoring designs that connect indicators to actionable escalation and decision-making, proving governance is proactive rather than purely reactive. Produced by BareMetalCyber.com, where you’ll find more cyber audio courses, books, and information to strengthen your educational path. Also, if you want to stay up to date with the latest news, visit DailyCyber.News for a newsletter you can use, and a daily podcast you can commute with.
