RSK-03: Risk Management Resourcing
Mechanisms exist to reduce the magnitude or likelihood of potential impacts by resourcing the capability required to manage technology-related risks.
Renumbered: Formerly RSK-01.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, RSK-03 was Risk Identification. That control is now RSK-09.
Control Question: Does the organization reduce the magnitude or likelihood of potential impacts by resourcing the capability required to manage technology-related risks?
General (4)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| ISO 31000 2018 | 5.3 5.4.2 5.4.4 |
| ISO 31010 2009 | 6.3 |
| ISO 42001 2023 | 5.1 |
| NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 | GOVERN 1.3 GOVERN 1.4 MANAGE 2.1 |
US (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA Federal FCA CRM 2023 | 609.930(a) |
EMEA (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA EU NIS2 Annex 2024 | 2.1.2(e) |
APAC (1)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 | 9.3 11.3(i) |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 — Well Defined
Risk Management (RSK) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with RSK domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with RSK domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A risk management team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain RSK domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of risk management operations (e.g., risk management solution, GRC platform and TPRM tool). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with RSK domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to reduce the magnitude or likelihood of potential impacts by resourcing the capability required to manage technology-related risks.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Assessment Objectives
- RSK-03_A01 an executive steering committee, or advisory board, identifies necessary resourcing for the capability required to manage technology-related risks.
- RSK-03_A02 the organization's incident response capability is resourced accordingly so it can reduce the magnitude or likelihood of potential impacts from technology-related risks.
- RSK-03_A03 recurring reviews of incident response operations are used to benchmark resourcing requirements for incident response operations.
Evidence Requirements
- E-RSK-01 Risk Management Program (RMP)
-
Documented evidence of a Risk Management Program (RMP). This is program-level documentation in the form of a runbook, playbook or a similar format provides guidance on organizational practices that support existing policies and standards.
Risk Management
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Risk Management Program (RMP)
Small
- Risk Management Program (RMP)
Medium
- Risk Management Program (RMP)
Large
- Risk Management Program (RMP)
Enterprise
- Risk Management Program (RMP)