GRC Engineer
Posts
⚙️ The GRC Graduation: From Compliance Theatre to Risk-Driven Insights

⚙️ The GRC Graduation: From Compliance Theatre to Risk-Driven Insights

A step-by-step framework for GRC professionals to build decision support systems, implement risk-driven metrics, and engineer security foundations that make compliance effortless

Ayoub Fandi
June 12, 2025

Most GRC programs are stuck collecting compliance artefacts.

The best ones engineer systems that make incidents less likely and less impactful.

What's the difference?

They measure incidents prevented, not audit findings closed. They build decision support systems, not documentation repositories. They create insight delivery engines that executives actually use. They treat risk registers as data infrastructure, not filing cabinets.

Your organisation rewards compliance theatre because that's what you're optimised to deliver.

Ready to graduate?

IN PARTNERSHIP WITH

Secure data access, even when AI is in the loop

Formal is a data security proxy that gives you visibility and control where it matters most: at the point of data access. It sits between your AI agents, services, and datastores to inspect every request in real time.

You get protocol-level context—who made the call, what was requested, whether it involved PII or secrets, and what policy should apply.

Why It Matters 🔍

The why: the core problem this solves and why you should care

Most GRC professionals are trapped in what I call the "Compliance Ceiling."

You're excellent at maintaining states: keeping certifications current, preparing for audits, updating policies. But.. your organisation rewards compliance theatre over risk reduction.

The Graduation Crisis

Compliance-Driven Symptoms	Business Impact
Customer certifications drive your roadmap	Security architecture optimised for sales, not threats
"We need SOC 2" beats "We need to reduce breach risk"	Resources allocated to certificates instead of resilience
CISOs measure audit nonconformities	Security leadership disconnected from actual threat landscape
Risk programs exist to satisfy auditors	Risk management becomes documentation exercise
Risk owners get heatmaps without action plans	Decision paralysis and reactive security posture

The strategic problem: When sales needs drive your security architecture, you optimise for certificates instead of resilience.

Real Talk: I've seen a fintech that had an unqualified SOC 2 and ISO 27001 certificate but couldn't answer basic questions like "How many admin accounts do we actually have?" or "What happens if our primary database goes down?" The certificates looked great in sales decks, but their actual security posture was a mystery.

The graduation from GRC as Compliance to GRC as Risk isn't just a career move. It's the difference between being a business cost centre and being a strategic business enabler that actually prevents incidents.

# Traditional GRC approach
def compliance_driven_grc():
   while audit_approaching():
       collect_screenshots()
       update_policies() 
       schedule_meetings()
       stress_about_findings()
       # Reset after audit - no continuous improvement
       return "compliant_until_next_audit"
       
# Risk-driven GRC approach  
def risk_driven_grc():
   while business_operating():
       threats = identify_current_threats()
       decisions = document_business_decisions(threats)
       insights = transform_to_executive_dashboard(decisions)
       
       if engineering_teams.can_act_on(insights):
           outcomes = implement_risk_controls(insights)
           validate_effectiveness(outcomes)
           # Compliance certificate appears automatically
       else:
           improve_translation_layer()
           
   return "security_excellence_achieved"

# The graduation moment: When your risk program becomes a decision engine,
# not a documentation graveyard

Strategic Framework 🧩

The what: The conceptual approach broken down into 3 main principles

Flip Your Success Metrics

The incentive structure determines behaviour. If your performance review rewards compliance artifacts over risk reduction, you'll optimize for the wrong outcomes.

The Metrics Revolution

Compliance-driven programs measure process adherence: Did we complete the checklist? Did we satisfy the auditor? Did we maintain our certifications? These metrics create a false sense of security because they measure activity, not outcomes.

Risk-driven programs measure security improvement: Are we actually more secure than last quarter? Can we prove our controls prevent the threats they're designed to address? Are we reducing our attack surface faster than new threats are emerging?

The fundamental shift happens when you start tracking mean time to threat remediation instead of audit findings closed. When you measure critical vulnerabilities eliminated instead of policies updated. When you celebrate incidents prevented instead of training completion rates.

The key insight: Compliance metrics measure adherence to process. Risk metrics measure improvement in security outcomes.

This isn't about abandoning compliance metrics entirely. It's about reframing them as lagging indicators of risk management effectiveness rather than primary objectives.Contextual Translation Layers

Build Decision Support Systems, Not Documentation Repositories

Compliance programs ask: "Can we prove we did this?"
Risk programs ask: "What should we fix first and how do we know when we've improved?"

The Decision Support Transformation

Documentation Approach	Decision Support Approach
Risk register for audit evidence	Risk register as priority engine
Quarterly risk reviews	Continuous risk-based resource allocation
Static heatmaps	Dynamic remediation workflows
Compliance-driven risk categories	Business impact-driven risk taxonomy
Risk acceptance forms	Risk treatment decision trees

Your risk register shouldn't be a documentation repository. It should be a decision-making engine that directly feeds engineering backlogs, executive reporting, and resource allocation decisions.

Engineer Risk-Driven Compliance

The most mature organizations don't chase compliance frameworks. They build security foundations so strong that compliance simply happens.

The Paradigm Shift: Instead of implementing "SOC 2 controls," implement "our security baseline" that happens to satisfy SOC 2, ISO 27001, and PCI DSS simultaneously.

This is where GRC Engineering becomes essential. You can't execute risk-driven GRC at scale without engineering principles: automation, continuous monitoring, infrastructure-as-code approaches, and API-driven evidence collection.

Not all automation is created equal.

Most GRC automation tools crumble at enterprise scale. Cypago is the only Cyber GRC automation tool that was purpose-built for the complexity and scale of large orgs - hybrid environments, custom workflows, and overlapping frameworks. Fast to deploy, flexible where it matters.

Ready to give it a spin?

Execution Blueprint 🛠️

The how: 3 practical steps to put this strategy into action at your organisation

Step 1: Audit Your Incentive Structure

Before changing what you do, examine what you're rewarded for doing.

The Graduation Readiness Assessment

Complete this diagnostic:

Assessment Question	Compliance-Driven	Risk-Driven	Your Score
What drives your quarterly priorities?	Audit deadlines	Threat landscape changes	___
How is your performance measured?	Findings closed	Incidents prevented	___
What gets celebrated by leadership?	Passing audits	Reducing attack surface	___
Where do you spend most of your time?	Evidence collection	Risk remediation	___
What questions do stakeholders ask you?	"Are we compliant?"	"How secure are we?"	___

Scoring:

0-2 Risk-Driven responses: You're stuck in compliance mode
3-4 Risk-Driven responses: You're in transition
5 Risk-Driven responses: You've graduated to risk leadership

Create Your Incentive Realignment Plan

Quarter 1 Actions:

Propose risk-based OKRs that complement (don't replace) compliance requirements
Request specific metrics around vulnerability reduction and incident prevention
Establish success criteria that connect GRC work to business outcomes

Quarter 2-3 Focus:

Build dashboards that show risk trend analysis, not just compliance status
Create executive reporting that highlights security improvements, not just audit results
Implement feedback loops that reward proactive risk identification

Step 2: Build Risk-to-Action Engineering Pipelines

Transform your risk management from quarterly reviews to continuous operations.

The Technical Architecture of Risk-Driven GRC

Phase 1: Design Your Risk Register as Decision Infrastructure

Document the underlying decision for every risk analysis - did it inform resource prioritization, strategic direction, or remediation planning?
Separate issues from risks - keep operational problems distinct from strategic uncertainties to prevent register bloat
Map stakeholder use cases - if you can't identify strong use cases for register data, reconsider whether a risk register is the right tool
Think data lake, not document - structure your risk register for analytics and insights, not just audit evidence

Phase 2: Build Insight Delivery Systems

Your risk register tool should rarely see daylight - leadership needs insights in dashboards, memos, or decks they're already using
Create automated insight pipelines that transform risk data into executive-ready summaries
Establish thoughtful coverage planning - acknowledge blind spots, set realistic scope expectations, and create expansion roadmaps
Connect every risk to specific business decisions being made

Phase 3: Implement Continuous Risk-Engineering Integration

Replace quarterly risk reviews with continuous monitoring and real-time risk-to-backlog integration
Build automated validation that checks whether controls actually prevent the risks they're designed to address
Create feedback loops that update risk status based on actual remediation progress and business outcomes

Phase 4: Measure Risk Engineering Effectiveness

Traditional Risk Metrics	Engineering-Driven Risk Metrics
Risks identified per quarter	Decisions influenced by risk analysis
Risk register completion rate	Percentage of high risks with active remediation
Risk review meeting attendance	Risk prediction accuracy vs. actual incidents
Risk acceptance forms signed	Business outcomes improved by risk insights

Step 3: Master Technical Translation Skills

The career-defining skill for risk-focused GRC professionals is technical translation: converting between business risk language and engineering implementation requirements.

The Translation Matrix (examples)

Business Risk Language	Technical Implementation	Engineering Action
"Unauthorized access to customer data"	"Excessive S3 bucket permissions"	"Implement least-privilege IAM policies"
"Service availability impact"	"Single points of failure in architecture"	"Deploy redundant infrastructure"
"Revenue protection requires..."	"API rate limiting insufficient"	"Configure DDoS protection and monitoring"
"Regulatory compliance violation"	"Data retention policy violations"	"Automate data lifecycle management"

Build Your Technical Vocabulary Systematically

Month 1-2: Infrastructure Fundamentals

Shadow your DevOps team for 2 hours weekly
Learn to read basic Terraform/CloudFormation configurations
Understand your organisation's actual tech stack, not just the security tools

Month 3-4: Security Integration

Practice converting vulnerability scanner outputs into business impact summaries
Build templates that transform technical findings into executive-ready risk reports
Create a "risk dictionary" mapping technical vulnerabilities to business consequences

Month 5-6: Engineering Partnership

Attend engineering sprint planning meetings as an observer
Learn how your security requirements actually get implemented
Develop relationships with technical teams beyond just asking for evidence

Success Signals You've Graduated

✅ Engineering teams request your input on architecture decisions
✅ Your CISO asks for threat trend analysis, not just compliance status
✅ Business leaders cite your risk assessments in strategic planning
✅ Your risk predictions correlate (even loosely) with actual security incidents

Did you enjoy this week's entry?

Content Queue 📖

The learn: This week's resource to dive deeper on the topic

This week, I’ll recommend three individuals with great insights on cyber risk management (a bit of quantification bias as well), you should follow all of them!

Linda Fry
Tony Martin-Vegue (has a newsletter coming soon!)
Richard Seiersen

That’s all for this week’s issue, folks!

If you enjoyed it, you might also enjoy:

My spicier takes on LinkedIn [/in/ayoubfandi]
Listening to the GRC Engineering Podcast

See you next week!

Reply

or to participate.