Governance
IAM Metrics, Risk & Executive Visibility
This control asks one thing: How does your organization measure, report, and act on Identity & Access Management risk and performance?
Low Maturity
What Failure Looks Like
The documented failure mode at level 0 (Absent) on the 0 to 4 maturity scale:
Leadership has no visibility into identity risk accumulation. Budget decisions are made blindly until a breach or audit failure forces action.
High Maturity
What Good Looks Like
The business value the methodology documents at level 4 (Optimized):
Transforms IAM into a measurable, defensible, and optimizable enterprise risk control.
Next Step
A Typical Next Move
For programs sitting around level 0 (Absent), the methodology recommends this as the next rational step:
Define a minimal IAM metrics set focused on access risk, lifecycle failures, and control coverage.
What reaching level 2 (Developing) unlocks
Informed prioritization within security programs.
Evidence
Evidence Assessors Ask For
A sample of the artifacts an assessor expects to see around level 2 (Developing):
- Defined IAM KRIs
- Dashboards owned by IAM or Security teams
- Metrics reviewed in operational or security forums
Compliance
Compliance Frameworks That Cite This Control
The bank's regulatory mapping for GOV-02 resolves to 4 frameworks with a researched compliance threshold. Weakness here shows up in audits, not only in incidents.
Where Does Your Program Land on GOV-02?
This page is the teaser layer. The full rubric behind GOV-02 defines 5 scored maturity levels, 0 to 4, each with its own operating model, evidence expectations, and regulatory citations. That rubric is the scoring instrument, so it ships inside the assessment rather than on a marketing page. Running the assessment takes about 20 minutes and no signup is required to start.