Information security service management can include financial and non-financial indicators to enable performance assessments. However, selected indicators must represent a mathematically measurable quality. An adopted KPI should have an established target, associated with a completion date and a path for improvement. Furthermore, an adequate KPI enables determination of the degree of change from the current state to future expectations. For instance, an information security goal might address access privileges. Consequently, considering the current state requires comparison to accepted standards for performance measurement, the “time to grant access privileges” KPI would specify whether the measurement duration is in minutes, hours or days. Reflecting the established time basis, a target for the KPI can be derived. Therefore, “reduce time to grant access privileges by four percent per year” communicates a clear target that employees should understand and undertake specific actions to accomplish.
One of the managerial challenges for process-driven entities is integrating ‘leading indicators’ into KPIs. Similar to leading economic indicators, information security leading KPIs enable swift conditional service delivery responses to ‘code red’ impact alerts. If leading indicators are properly implemented, management can preemptively adjust a process (or processes) before the expiration date on achieving an expected outcome.
“View Part I of the Measuring Delivery Value series here“