What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 6.1 Actions to address risks and opportunities?

Register of risks and opportunities relating to BCMS effectiveness; Planned actions with owners and integration points into BCMS processes; Evidence that BCMS risk is kept distinct from operational disruption risk.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 6.1?

BCMS risk conflated with disruption risk, so management system weaknesses are never surfaced

ISO 22301:2019 · Planning, ISO 22301:2019

`6.1` Actions to address risks and opportunities

Work out what could help or hinder the management system itself and plan what to do about it, keeping this separate from the disruption risks handled under business impact analysis and risk assessment.

Source: ISO 22301:2019, 6.1. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open ISO 22301:2019 in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Document repository

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Evidence that BCMS risk is kept distinct from operational disruption risk · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Register of risks and opportunities relating to BCMS effectiveness · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Planned actions with owners and integration points into BCMS processes · Document repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

BCMS risk conflated with disruption risk, so management system weaknesses are never surfaced
Opportunities omitted entirely, leaving a one sided risk register
Actions planned but never integrated into a BCMS process or evaluated

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

5.3 Roles, responsibilities and authorities · 6.1.1 Determining risks and opportunities