Integrated Risk Management (IRM) vs Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC)  

When managing the concept of risk or compliance, it is crucial to understand that (1) the products and services that a business sells, (2) the partnerships it enters into and (3) the locations of its operations are the business decisions that dictate the statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations that cybersecurity & privacy teams are tasked to enforce. Cybersecurity and privacy personnel do not dictate the requirements - they are merely the messenger by pointing out the controls that need to exist to satisfy those business requirements.

In the early 2000s, the term “Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC)” was coined to describe the overall governance function for a cybersecurity program. Today, there is a marketing effort to shift away from the term of GRC for “Integrated Risk Management (IRM).” Essentially, this re-branding is a disingenuous marketing attempt to sell new products and services under a different name. GRC is not dead, just hyped as IRM in an attempt to create new sales opportunities and remain relevant. Weak or non-existent processes are not magically fixed by GRC/IRM, since those tools only help automate existing processes. The same pitfalls that doomed many GRC rollouts and tainted the reputations of several GRC providers equally apply to IRM initiatives, since the same underlying content requirements exist. This is where "content is king" in the GRC/IRM space, since that underlying content is what makes a GRC/IRM roll out successful in the long-term.

The hype is that IRM is designed to be a “risk-focused, integrated solution” whereas GRC is solely focused on compliance. If you honestly look at it, both GRC and IRM both manage risk and address compliance requirements.

 

Both GRC and IRM rely upon comprehensive governance documentation to be efficient – policies, control objectives, standards, guidelines, controls, metrics and procedures (control activities). Without those fundamental components, a GRC/IRM deployment will, at best, result in mediocre results. 

Furthering the hype about IRM is the focus on “integrated solutions” that can adapt to the dynamic, ecosystem-driven environment that is quickly-evolving. This makes it appear that only IRM offers Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), or performance goals, to provide management-level oversight of performance. Unfortunately for IRM marketing efforts, the facts are that traditional GRC suites offer these metrics and reporting capabilities, as well as API integration with point solution tools (e.g., vulnerability scanners, ticketing systems, change control, etc.).

In reality, either a GRC or IRM tool can be used to manage a cybersecurity program from strategic, to operational, to tactical aspects.

© Compliance Forge, LLC (ComplianceForge). All Rights Reserved.

This website does not render professional services advice and is not a substitute for dedicated professional services. If you have compliance questions, you should consult a cybersecurity or privacy professional to discuss your specific needs. Compliance Forge, LLC (ComplianceForge) disclaims any liability whatsoever for any documentation, information, or other material which is or may become a part of the website. ComplianceForge does not warrant or guarantee that the information will not be offensive to any user. User is hereby put on notice that by accessing and using the website, user assumes the risk that the information and documentation contained in the web site may be offensive and/or may not meet the needs and requirements of the user. The entire risk as to the use of this website is assumed by the user.

ComplianceForge reserves the right to refuse service, in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory parameters.

  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Google+ Social Icon