5.8.1 Nonconformity and corrective action
The nonconformity and corrective action requirements of ISO/IEC 27001 apply to the PIMS, so a privacy nonconformity must be reacted to, its cause evaluated and eliminated, similar occurrences checked for, the corrective
4
artefacts
0
held by a system
2
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
- Corrective action with effectiveness review · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Retained evidence of the nonconformity and the outcome · Policy repository / GRC workspace
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Nonconformity register including privacy findings from audit, incident and complaint · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Root cause analysis and extent of condition check · 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
- Individual complaints resolved one by one with the systemic cause never examined
- Extent of condition never checked, so the same defect persists in a sister processing activity
- Effectiveness review omitted, so recurrence is the only test the fix receives
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