CGEIT Exam Dumps - Certified in the Governance of Enterprise IT Exam

This is because moving all IT applications to an external SaaS cloud provider means that the organization is outsourcing the development, deployment, maintenance, and operation of its IT applications to a third-party vendor. This implies that the organization is relinquishing some control and ownership over its IT applications, and relying on the vendor to provide the required functionality, performance, quality, and security1. Therefore, the organization needs to shift its focus from delivering IT services internally to managing IT services externally. This involves the following activities2:

Establishing and maintaining a clear and comprehensive contract or service level agreement (SLA) with the SaaS vendor that defines the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and outcomes of both parties2

Monitoring and measuring the SaaS vendor’s compliance with the contract or SLA, and ensuring that the vendor meets the agreed service levels, standards, and metrics2

Communicating and collaborating with the SaaS vendor regularly, and resolving any issues, conflicts, or changes that may arise during the service delivery2

Evaluating and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the SaaS vendor’s service delivery, and identifying and implementing any opportunities for innovation or optimization2

Managing the risks and challenges associated with outsourcing IT services to a SaaS vendor, such as data privacy, security, availability, compatibility, integration, dependency, cost, and performance issues2

The shift from service delivery to service management can have a significant impact on the IT governance framework, processes, policies, and practices of the organization. It can also affect the IT skills, roles, and responsibilities of the IT staff and stakeholders. Therefore, the organization needs to adapt and adjust its IT governance approach accordingly to ensure that it can effectively oversee and optimize its IT services in a SaaS environment3.

The other options, the integration of the IT department with business lines, the improvement of IT service alignment with business, and the necessity to update key risk indicators (KRIs) are not as significant as the shift from service delivery to service management for moving all IT applications to an external SaaS cloud provider from an IT governance perspective. They are more related to the outcomes or consequences of moving to a SaaS environment, rather than the impact or change itself. They may also not be unique or specific to a SaaS environment, as they may apply to other types or models of IT service delivery as well.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Benefits Realization domain, emphasizes the importance of structured decision-making for IT investments to ensure they deliver value. A business case provides a comprehensive justification for an investment, including objectives, costs, benefits, risks, and alignment with business goals. It enables stakeholders to make informed decisions by presenting a clear rationale and expected outcomes. For example, a business case for a new CRM system would detail projected revenue increases and implementation costs. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s APO05-Managed Portfolio, which highlights the business case as a critical tool for investment evaluation.

Option B: Technology roadmap outlines future technology plans but lacks the detailed financial and benefit analysis needed for investment decisions.

Option C: Program plan focuses on execution details, not the justification for investment.

Option D: Risk classification addresses risk but doesn’t encompass the full scope of benefits and costs.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s APO05 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on value-driven investment decisions. The business case is a standard ISACA tool for informed decision-making.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 3: Benefits Realization (focus on investment decision-making).

COBIT 2019, APO05-Managed Portfolio.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of business case), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

The best way to address the issue of IT staff not keeping their skills current, despite an adequate training budget, is to establish an agreed-upon skills development plan with each employee. This personalized approach ensures that training and development activities are directly aligned with both the organization's needs and the individual's career goals, thereby increasing the likelihood of participation and the application of new skills. While providing incentives and creating centers of excellence can be supportive, a tailored development plan directly engages each staff member in their growth, ensuring relevance and commitment.

Performing a gap analysisis the first step in understanding whether existing IT capabilities and resources are sufficient to meet the demands of a new enterprise strategy. A gap analysiscompares current capabilities with the strategic requirements, identifying shortfalls in skills, infrastructure, processes, and other resources.

Only after identifying the gaps can appropriate planning (e.g., capacity management, capability strategy, resource management) be effectively initiated.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Risk Optimization domain, emphasizes the importance of aligning IT risk management with the enterprise’s overall risk management strategy. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used to monitor potential risks and provide early warnings. To establish effective KRIs, the enterprise must first understand its risk tolerance and priorities.

Option A: The enterprise risk appetite should be identified first. Risk appetite defines the level of risk the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, guiding the selection of KRIs. For example, if the enterprise has a low risk appetite for data breaches, KRIs might focus on metrics like unauthorized access attempts. Identifying risk appetite ensures KRIs are relevant and aligned with strategic goals. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s APO12-Managed Risk, which highlights risk appetite as a foundational element of risk management.

Option B: Key performance metrics relate to performance, not risk, and are not directly relevant to KRIs.

Option C: Risk mitigation strategies are developed after identifying risks and KRIs, not before.

Option D: Enterprise architecture (EA) components may inform risk identification but are secondary to defining risk appetite.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s APO12 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on risk management foundations. Risk appetite is a prerequisite for KRI development in ISACA’s frameworks.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 4: Risk Optimization (focus on risk management and KRIs).

COBIT 2019, APO12-Managed Risk.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of risk appetite and KRIs), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.