Start a new topic and get direct answers from the Expert Advice Community.
CREATE NEW TOPIC +Guest
I always recommend following three ways to determine risks:
In this free webinar on-demand - ISO 9001:2015 clause 4 - Context of the organization, interested parties, and scope - https://advisera.com/9001academy/webinar/iso-90012015-clause-4-context-of-the-organization-interested-parties-and-scope-free-webinar-on-demand/ - I show examples of risks and opportunities derived from context and interested parties.
ISO 9001:2015 promotes the process approach and in this free webinar on-demand - The Process Approach - What it is, why it is important, and how to do it - https://advisera.com/9001academy/webinar/iso-9001-process-approach-free-webinar-on-demand/ I show how to relate processes, risks, training, documentation, and control.
In this free webinar on-demand - How to implement risk management in ISO 9001:2015 - https://advisera.com/9001academy/webinar/how-to-implement-risk-management-in-iso-90012015-free-webinar/ - I show some examples of determining risks and then acting on them.
You can find more information below about risks.
First of all, if the email collected are composed like info@company.com these are not considered as personal data under GDPR, so the answer is yes.On the contrary, if you are planning to collect email like name.surname@company.com these email addresses are considered as personal data under GDPR. You can process personal data using the legitimate interest as legal ground only to introduce your company to a potential client with the so-called cold email.
There must be relevance between the sender and the recipient of the email. For example, I can send a cold email to introduce a company that offers a selection of employees to an HR Manager, but I cannot do the same to the Head of Logistics. The reason is that once the email address is published on the company website, the owner consent to be contacted for reasons connected to the role in the company.Of course, in the cold email, you can add a button to subscribe to a newsletter and receive information on products, offers, and so on.
To know how to ensure email marketing compliance you can read this article:
If you need to understand how to manage email addresses under GDPR, you can consider enrolling in our free online training EU GDPR Foundations Course: https://advisera.com/training/eu-gdpr-foundations-course//
I can give you my experience. I answer your question in three layers:
presents an example and also includes another kind of graphic, the bullet chart useful to compare current performance with target or benchmark. You can find this picture in our free webinar on-demand - Measurement, analysis, and improvement according to ISO 9001:2015 - https://advisera.com/9001academy/webinar/measurement-analysis-and-improvement-according-to-iso-9001-2015-free-webinar/A possible approach to implement a quality management system can be:
To speed up the process you can use our Documentation Toolkit for the implementation of ISO 9001:2015 here - https://advisera.com/9001academy/iso-9001-documentation-toolkit/ and check the free previews. You can also watch this free webinar on demand - How to use a Documentation Toolkit for the implementation of ISO 9001 - https://advisera.com/9001academy/webinar/how-to-use-a-documentation-toolkit-for-the-implementation-of-iso-9001-free-webinar-on-demand/
This is a very short description of the journey but below you can find more detailed information:
You can find more information below:
I understand that you are receiving information from performance review done by a client. Is that client important? Is that client part of the segment of target clients? For example, low cost airlines receive a lot of complaints, but most of those complaints are not about errors or “defects”, but about decisions made according to its strategy of keeping costs down. In the case you are receiving performance feedback from a target-client, you can start to acknowledge and thank the information received. Then, analyze and understand if it makes sense, if the company can frame and incorporate it. And communicate the decision to the customer. If the decision is to frame it, it may make sense to communicate the timing for its implementation.
You can find more information below:
There is no special difference. Every distributor can be a transport provider also. The distributor does not have to make installation of the medical devices, this depends on the agreement between manufacturer and distributor.
First is important to note that RTO and RPO are most often defined based on a scenario evaluation, instead of calculated, because calculating them can become very complex and time-consuming.
Considering that, RTO (Recovery Time Objective) is defined based on how fast you want to resume your operations after a disruption, while RPO (Recovery Point Objective) is defined based on how much data you can afford to lose due to a disruption.
For example, if an application has an RTO of 1 day and an RPO of 4 hours, it means that this application can be recovered (resume normal operation) in one day, but the information from the last 4 hours before the interruption occurred will be lost.
This article will provide you a further explanation about RPO and RTO:
These materials will also help you regarding RPO and RTO:
1 - It’s not yet clear to me what we must do exactly if a risk from the treatment table is not acceptable and requires some implementations.
What is the accepted time frame for risks mitigation?
For an unacceptable risk which requires new controls for treatment, what if we plan the implementation – say – 1 or 2 years later?
Is it allowed by the standard and/or auditor?
Will it be visible in SoA’s residual risks?
In other words, does it have to be addressed before the next assessment, or the next audit, or freely?
ISO 27001 does not prescribe a time frame to implement controls, so organizations are free to define the time frame that best suits them, but a time frame of 1 or 2 years is not recommended, because by the time you finish the implementation the risks may have changed (due to changes in business conditions or changes in threats and vulnerabilities), and the previously planned controls may not be effective or needed anymore.
Now, considering certification purposes, at least the controls related to the most relevant risks must be implemented, with proper evidence of implementation and operation, by the time of the certification audit, because risk treatment is a mandatory clause, and the certification auditor will check this. Risks with controls not implemented should be accepted by the organization, and these must be included as defined in the Statement of Applicability template (included in the toolkit you bought, you have access to a video tutorial that can help you fill the SoA document).
For further information, see:
2 - If the risks must be absolutely mitigated “quickly” when not accepted, then we may need to relax the acceptance criteria to encompass them. Can we say:
Based on a yearly budget, state that i.e. high risks can be accepted only if there is no room left for the implementations in the running assessment… (or financial year… somehow)
The risk mitigation may therefore be postponed to the next assessment (hopefully not indefinitely..) or “whenever possible”
Would that kind of acceptance criteria fit with the standards and pose no issue with auditors?
I suppose that such accepted risks will again appear in the SoA (but it makes sense)
ISO 27001 does not prescribe risk acceptance criteria, only that they must be defined. Considering that, your organization can establish any criteria it sees fit (your criteria example is acceptable). You only have to be careful to not postpone relevant risks indefinitely, because this can be seen as a lack of commitment to information security, and this can compromise certification. About SOA, your assumption is correct, the accepted risks will appear in the SOA.
Included in your toolkit, also there is a video tutorial that can help you with risk assessment and treatment.
This material can also help you:
3 - Concerning the risk assessment:
Will our estimations of impact or likelihood be strongly challenged by the auditor? (sometimes there is room for debate..)
Do we have to prepare evidence for each asset assessment or risk, to assist in the verification?
Clearly, doing so, in advance, and for many risks/assets is not feasible for us
I guess the focus will be on the SoA instead and how the controls are implemented? (or to explain why they are not)
The auditor will check if your estimations make sense considering your organizational context and ISMS scope and will only make additional questions if something is too far away from normally expected results (for example, the impact of datacenter down to fire valued as 1 on a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 is the highest impact).
For audit purposes, the Risk Assessment Table and The Risk Treatment Table are sufficient for the auditor.
The SoA is the initial guide for the auditor to understand your information security context, but during the audit, he will check how the controls are implemented.
This article will provide you a further explanation about estimating risks:
Please note that neither standard of ISO 27000 group, or from ISO 31000 group prescribes that the owner of information assets must be the owner of the information risk, nor that informational risk is an operational risk.
ISO 27001 requires, and ISO 31000 suggests, the definition of risk owner, but neither prescribes a framework to organize risks, so organizations are free to organize them as they see fit.
These articles will provide you a further explanation about risk owner and asset owner:
This material will also help you:
It is possible to have a single certification for your organization and its subsidiaries, but please note that implementing a certification in multiple geographic locations is a complex, and more expensive, task and you should go for it only if it is really necessary for business strategies and objectives. Instead, you should consider the prioritization of locations and implementing the certification one location at a time. Additionally, with multiple certifications, in case one location has some problem with fulfilling requirements, this will not affect the certification of other sites.
These articles will provide you a further explanation about scope definition:
This article will provide an additional explanation about single certification for multiples entities (although it is about ISO 9001, the same concept applies to ISO 27001):
This material may also help: