According to the results of a global study by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) and Willis Towers Watson, the majority of managers around the world think that organizations can do better when they learn from past cyber mistakes.
In the past year, one third of the surveyed companies have experienced a serious cyber incident – a serious cyber event that breaks these operations, damages their financial and damaging reputation and raises the odds on one another over the next 12 months, “the boards could direct the cyber-resistant organization.”
Though most of the reports see them as a good job of intervention, only 13 percent of the report says that they are above average for including learners from cyber events into their resistance strategies.
The survey did not find a consensus among management boards and managers about cyber resilience planning, distribution of strategies across the organization, where funds would be allocated, and which areas of the organization were most at risk.
The division into cyberspace was also evident in geographies, as North American companies strongly contrasted with colleagues in Asia, and to a degree, the EU, strongly contending with issues such as the anticipation and recovery potentials of the incidence and influence of cyber attacks. a violation.
Interestingly, the four regions surveyed (North America, UK, Europe and Asia) had a 21 per cent rate of cyber resilience perceived at the highest level in the United Kingdom.
Other important findings of the report are:
Average corporate cyber resilience spending constituted 1.7 percent of revenue, and 96 percent of executive board members think this is not enough.
Many companies do not rely on skills to fuse and cyber skills to develop an intelligent workforce.
Managers view the size of financial and reputation as the most important reason for the supervision of the board.
North America continued to spend the highest percentage of cyber flexibil- ity, about one percent of its income, while other regions were spending 1-2 percent or less.
There is little consensus among managers about how to distribute cyber budget – but very close responses have been given between “technology that hardens cyber defenses” and “acquisition of IT skills, skills training / development”.
While most regions (3 out of 4) think that the board needs to monitor the risks of cyberspace, Europe did not agree that it should be a special cyber group.
“It is important for companies to understand that reaching cyberspace flexibility is a company-wide necessity, something that should not be tied to specific roles or functions,” says Anthony Dagostino, Willis Towers Watson and global risk risk.
Sponsorship: insurance news. You deserve to upgrade. Go Pro! ıjpro. Insurance news for steroids.
“The boards should emphasize the need for a strategic framework and adjust the voice within their organization by empowering stakeholders such as C-Suite, IT, risk, HR, legal and integrated risk management and compliance to execute the flexibility strategy. added.
“While technology continues to be a vital defense, more than half of the cyber incidents can be attributed to employee behavior and talent deficits in cyber security roles, so investing in other areas such as human capital solutions and cyber insurance should become part of the normal board and C . “Speak the site,” Dagostino explained.
EIU has surveyed more than 450 companies around the world on the challenges they faced in creating strategies and cyber-resilient organizations.
Legal warning !
The information, comments and suggestions there are not covered by investment advice. It is based on the author's personal opinions. These views may not fit your financial situation and risk and return preferences. For this reason, based solely on this information, investment decisions may not have the appropriate consequences for your expectation. Our Site is not responsible for any direct or indirect damages incurred by the investors as a result of the use of the information on the Site, deficiencies in the sources, damages incurred by profit, moral damages, or damage to third parties.