5.1 Leadership and commitment
Top management must personally own the BCMS: aligning the continuity policy and objectives with the strategic direction, integrating BCMS requirements into business processes, making resources available, communicating wh
5
artefacts
0
held by a system
1
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
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
- Evidence of managers below top level held accountable for continuity in their areas · Document repository
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Minutes showing top management setting or approving continuity policy and objectives · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Evidence of BCMS requirements embedded in business process documentation · Document repository
- Approved budget or resource allocation traceable to the BCMS · Document repository
- Internal communications from top management about continuity · Document repository
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
- Commitment evidenced only by a signature on the policy
- Continuity funded from a residual budget with no top management decision behind it
- Continuity treated as a specialist function that no line manager is answerable for
- No link demonstrable between continuity objectives and strategic direction
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 sheet