Free Practice Questions for Isaca CGEIT Exam

This is because IT is a key enabler and driver of business strategy, and it needs to understand and align with the strategic vision, goals, and priorities of the enterprise1. By ensuring IT has knowledgeable representation and is included in the strategic planning process, the enterprise can:

Leverage IT’s expertise and insights to identify and evaluate the opportunities and challenges of the strategy change1

Ensure IT’s readiness and capability to support and execute the strategy change1

Avoid any gaps or misalignments between IT and business expectations and requirements1

Foster a collaborative and supportive relationship between IT and business stakeholders1

B. Increase the IT budget and approve an IT staff level increase to ensure resource availability for the strategy change. This is not the first step to prepare for the change in the enterprise’s board of directors’ strategy, as it may be premature or unnecessary to do so without a clear understanding and agreement of the scope, impact, and implications of the strategy change. Increasing the IT budget and staff level may also create inefficiencies or wastages if they are not aligned with the actual needs and priorities of the strategy change2.

C. Initiate an IT service awareness campaign to business system owners and implement service level agreements (SLAs). This is not the first step to prepare for the change in the enterprise’s board of directors’ strategy, as it may not be relevant or effective to do so without a clear definition and communication of the strategy change. Initiating an IT service awareness campaign and implementing SLAs are more related to the delivery and management of IT services, rather than the planning and alignment of IT strategy3.

D. Outsource both IT operations and IT development and implement controls based on a standardized framework. This is not the first step to prepare for the change in the enterprise’s board of directors’ strategy, as it may introduce new risks and challenges for IT governance, such as loss of control, dependency, compatibility, security, compliance, and cost issues4. Outsourcing both IT operations and development may also reduce the involvement and ownership of IT in the strategic planning process, which could affect its alignment and responsiveness to the strategy change4. Outsourcing should be carefully considered and evaluated based on the specific needs and circumstances of the enterprise, and should be complemented by a robust governance and management framework4.

Thebest governance-aligned approachis toseek input from appropriate stakeholders, including community representatives, environmental groups, and local government. This enables the organization to address concerns proactively and collaboratively, minimizing reputational and regulatory risks.

Waiting for complaints or making unilateral decisions (like buying land or reducing hours) may be less effective or even inappropriate without stakeholder input.

 A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a process that’s used to estimate the costs and benefits of projects or investments to determine their profitability for an organization. A CBA is a versatile method that’s often used for business administration, project management and public policy decisions1. A CBA can help the CIO prioritize the improvement initiatives based on theirexpected value and feasibility, and justify the allocation of resources and funding for them. A CBA can also align the IT goals with the enterprise objectives and demonstrate the IT value delivery to the stakeholders2. References :=

2: CGEIT Exam Content Outline | ISACA

1: Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Quick Guide with Examples and Templates

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Risk Optimization domain, states that the board of directors is responsible for setting the risk appetite, which defines the level of risk the enterprise is willing to accept to achieve its objectives. This guides the risk management strategy, ensuring alignment with business goals. For example, a conservative risk appetite might prioritize cybersecurity investments. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s EDM03-Ensured Risk Optimization, which assigns risk appetite to the board.

Option A: Risk management process is operational and defined by management.

Option B: Risk identification plan is tactical and not a board responsibility.

Option C: Risk treatment plan follows risk appetite setting.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s EDM03 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on board responsibilities. Risk appetite is a core ISACA board duty.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 4: Risk Optimization (focus on board roles).

COBIT 2019, EDM03-Ensured Risk Optimization.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, emphasizes monitoring IT resource performance to ensure alignment with business expectations. Performance monitoring requires clear, measurable criteria tied to service delivery.

Option D: Service level requirements is the most important to consider. These requirements, often defined in service level agreements (SLAs), specify performance metrics (e.g., uptime, response time) that IT resources must meet to support business operations. Monitoring against these requirements ensures IT delivers expected value. For example, if an SLA requires 99.9% system availability, performance monitoring focuses on this metric. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s APO09-Managed Service Agreements, which prioritizes service level monitoring.

Option A: Business impact analysis (BIA) assesses disruption impacts, not ongoing performance.

Option B: End-user feedback is valuable but subjective and less precise than service level metrics.

Option C: Centralized log analysis supports security and troubleshooting, not direct performance monitoring.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s APO09 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on service management. Service level requirements are the primary benchmark for IT performance in ISACA’s frameworks.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on service performance monitoring).

COBIT 2019, APO09-Managed Service Agreements.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of service level requirements), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

Outsourcing decisions require a clear understanding of the financial and operational implications. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition advises that conducting a cost-benefit analysis is the first step to evaluate whether outsourcing non-core IT processes aligns with enterprise objectives.

Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 5: Benefits Realization):"Before outsourcing IT processes, the enterprise should conduct a cost-benefit analysis to assess the financial, operational, and strategic implications. This analysis determines whether outsourcing delivers value and supports business objectives." (Approximate reference: Domain 5, Section on Outsourcing Decisions)

Conducting a cost-benefit analysis for outsourcing (option D) provides the data needed to make an informed decision, comparing costs, risks, and benefits of outsourcing versus in-house management.

Why not the other options?

A. Update resource allocation policies: Policy updates follow the decision to outsource, based on the analysis.

B. Issue a formal request for proposal (RFP) to outsourcing vendors: Issuing an RFP is premature without confirming that outsourcing is viable.

C. Establish service-level metrics for outsourced activities: Metrics are defined after deciding to outsource and selecting a vendor.

This is because KPIs are measurable values that indicate how well the IT governance framework is achieving its objectives and delivering value to the business1. By evaluating KPI results, the organization can:

Monitor and review the IT governance framework’s progress, performance, quality, and outcomes

Highlight the IT governance framework’s achievements, challenges, and opportunities

Demonstrate the alignment of the IT governance framework with the business strategy, goals, and priorities

Provide recommendations and feedback for the IT governance framework’s improvement and adjustment

Evaluating KPI results can provide a comprehensive and objective overview of the IT governance framework’s effectiveness and impact.

The other options, developing a business case for the program portfolio, benchmarking the IT governance framework to industry best practice, and reviewing results of IT audit reports are not as effective as evaluating KPI results for assessing the effectiveness of a newly established IT governance framework. They are more related to the design and implementation of the IT governance framework, rather than its evaluation. They may also be too narrow or subjective for assessing the IT governance framework’s effectiveness, as they may not cover all aspects or perspectives of the IT governance framework. They may also depend on external factors or standards that may not be relevant or applicable to the organization’s specific context and needs.

To help ensure that IT projects related to a new business opportunity deliver the required business outcomes, the best approach is to implement stage-gate reviews that require business sign-off at each critical phase of the project. This process provides structured checkpoints where project progress, alignment with business requirements, and expected outcomes can be evaluated and validated by business stakeholders. This ensures ongoing alignment between IT project execution and business objectives, allowing for timely adjustments as needed. Hiring consultants, developing policies, and focusing on process maturity are supportive actions, but stage-gate reviews with business sign-off directly link project progression to business expectations.

Performing stage-gate reviews throughout the life cycle of each project is the best way to ensure IT investment management processes are fully realizing the benefits identified in business cases. Stage-gate reviews provide structured checkpoints at critical phases of a project, allowing for the evaluation of progress, performance against objectives, and the continued viability and alignment with business goals. This approach enables timely adjustments to be made, ensuring that projects stay on track to deliver the expected benefits. While CIO review and approval, evaluating delegation of authority, and documenting lessons learned are valuable, they do not offer the continuous oversight and opportunity for course correction that stage-gate reviews do.

A steering committee involving business and IT is the best approach to enable effective communication to senior management regarding the project status for a strategic enterpriseresource management system implementation. This is because a steering committee is a group of senior executives, stakeholders, and experts who provide strategic direction, guidance, and oversight for the project1. A steering committee can help to:

Communicate the project vision, goals, benefits, and risks to senior management and other stakeholders1

Monitor and review the project progress, performance, quality, and deliverables1

Resolve any issues, conflicts, or changes that may arise during the project1

Ensure the alignment of the project with the business strategy, objectives, and priorities1

Provide support, resources, and sponsorship for the project1

A steering committee involving business and IT can ensure that both the functional and technical aspects of the project are well represented and communicated to senior management. This can help to avoid any misunderstandings, gaps, or misalignments between the business and IT perspectives. A steering committee can also facilitate effective communication among senior management, project team, and other stakeholders, and foster a collaborative and supportive environment for the project success2.

The other options, project management office with business and IT representatives, weekly project reports reviewed by business and IT management, and project status updates on the intranet are not as effective as a steering committee for enabling communication to senior management regarding the project status. A project management office is a centralized unit that provides standards, methodologies, tools, and support for project management3. A project management office can help to improve the efficiency and consistency of project delivery, but it does not have the authority or responsibility to communicate directly with senior management or influence their decisions3. Weekly project reports are documents that summarize the progress, performance, issues, and risks of a project in a given period4. Weekly project reports can help to keep senior management informed of the project status, but they may not be sufficient to address their concerns or expectations. Weekly project reports may also be too frequent or detailed for senior management who may prefer a higher-level or less frequent view of the project4. Project status updates on the intranet are web-based messages that provide information about the current state of a project5. Project status updates on the intranet can help to increase the visibility and transparency of the project status to senior management and other stakeholders, but they may not be effective in engaging them or soliciting their feedback. Project status updates on the intranet may also be overlooked or ignored by senior management who may have limited time or access to the intranet5. References := What is a Project Steering Committee? | Clarizen, How To Run An Effective Steering Committee Meeting - BrightWork, What Is a Project Management Office (PMO)? | Smartsheet, How To Write A Project Status Report: The Ultimate Guide, Project Status Update Email Sample : Templates and Examples

A new regulation introduces a potential risk that must be assessed to understand its impact on the enterprise’s operations and compliance obligations. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition stresses that the first step in addressing new risks, such as regulations, is to conduct a risk assessment to evaluate their significance and implications.

Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 3: Risk Optimization):"When a new regulation is identified, the first step is to assess the associated risk, including its potential impact on operations, compliance requirements, and the likelihood of enforcement. This assessment informs subsequent actions, such as developing mitigation plans or updating governance frameworks." (Approximate reference: Domain 3, Section on Risk Assessment)

Assessing the risk associated with the new regulation (option D) provides the enterprise with a clear understanding of the regulation’s impact, enabling informed decisions about compliance, mitigation, or strategic adjustments.

Why not the other options?

A. Request an action plan from the risk team: An action plan is premature without first assessing the risk’s scope and impact.

B. Determine whether the board wants to comply with the regulation: The board’s decision on compliance should be informed by a risk assessment, not precede it.

C. Update the risk management framework: Updating the framework may be necessary later but is not the first step, as the specific risk must be understood first.

Boards are most concerned with whether IT investments aredelivering the expected value and business outcomes. Thus, therealization of benefits in the business caseis the most relevant indicator of IT strategy execution effectiveness.

Risk metrics, SLAs, and spending detail are important butdo not directly measure success in achieving strategic outcomes.

Engaging stakeholders in scenario developmentis essential to identifying relevant and realistic crisis events that the business continuity plan should address. Stakeholders bring diverse perspectives on potential threats and operational priorities, which improves the completeness and effectiveness of the BCP.

Walk-throughs and communication reviews are important later stages, butscenario development is foundationalfor making the BCP comprehensive.

Collaborative tools and approachesenable integrated reporting, real-time data collection, and cross-functional analysis, which are crucial for measuring complex ESG metrics. These tools foster participation from different departments (HR, compliance, sustainability) and ensure that insights are holistic and timely.

While audit oversight provides governance validation and benchmarking offers external comparison,collaborative systems facilitate the ongoing operational visibility needed to manage ESG performance proactively.

Theprimary objective of outcome measuresis tomonitor whether the strategy is achieving its intended results. These measures evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the strategy after implementation, helping guide course corrections and value realization.

While clarifying strategy and governance are important,outcome measures are specifically about tracking success and performance results.