4.2 Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
Establish who holds a stake in the organization's continuity and what each of them requires of it, covering both stated expectations and the legal and regulatory obligations attached to the continuity of its products and
3
artefacts
0
held by a system
0
at each review
hard
to go live
Policy repository / GRC workspace
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
none for this control
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Interested party register with the requirement recorded against each party · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Register of applicable continuity related legal and regulatory obligations · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Evidence both registers are maintained rather than one time artefacts · Policy repository / GRC workspace
First move
This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.
Common gaps auditors find
- A stakeholder list with no requirement recorded against any entry
- Legal obligations treated as a compliance department concern and never connected to continuity planning
- Regulators, customers under contractual continuity terms or emergency services left off the register
Do this for your whole sheet
Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.
Build my evidence sheet4.1 Understanding the organization and its context · 4.2.1 General