The Citation table is designed to provide references and links within Content. This relationship supports proper attribution and source tracking within the platform. Therefore, Content is the correct parent table.

The risk register is a comprehensive document that contains all identified risks, including their description, potential impact, likelihood, assigned owners, and planned mitigation strategies. It is a crucial tool for effective risk management, allowing an organization to track and manage risks proactively. It makes sense to document identified risks rather than unidentified risks.

The tables that store the links from Entity Types to Policies and Entity Types to Control Objectives are: * **sn_compliance_m2m_policy_profile_type:** Links Policies to Entity Types. * **sn_compliance_m2m_statement_profile_type:** Links Control Objectives (Statements) to Entity Types. The other options, sn_compliance_m2m_policy_profile and sn_risk_m2m_risk_profile, do not exist in ServiceNow.

The policy lifecycle progresses through stages like Draft -> Review -> Awaiting Approval -> Published -> Retired. Control objectives are only active when the parent policy has reached the ‘Published‘ state.

The table sn_grc_m2m_profile_profile_type stores the links between entities and entity types within the GRC application. The other options are related to compliance and risk, but not the general entity to entity type mapping.

Approved policies are typically published to the Knowledge Base within ServiceNow. This allows users to easily access and review the policies.

The Scoping > Entity Types module within the Policy and Compliance application is where you manage and update Entity Types. Navigating to Policy and Compliance > Scoping > Entity Types provides access to the [sn_grc_profile_type] list, enabling modification and configuration of entity types.

The ServiceNow Store features applications that are all certified by ServiceNow, developed by ServiceNow Technology Partners, available in both paid and free models, and constructed on the ServiceNow platform itself. This combination provides users with a range of certified and compatible solutions.

The key points to emphasize regarding the audit engagement approval process are the state transitions based on approval/rejection and the presence of open tasks/issues. Approved engagements with open items proceed to Follow Up, while those without open items close. Rejected engagements return to Fieldwork. Options A, B, and C accurately reflect these behaviors.

Policy and Compliance Management provides the necessary framework for managing internal or external consultancy processes aimed at proving the effectiveness of existing controls. Audit Management focuses more on actual audit execution, Risk Management focuses on identifying and mitigating risks, and Vendor Risk Management is related to third-party risks.

ServiceNow GRC primarily utilizes Quantitative and Qualitative methods for risk scoring. Inherent and Residual are types of Risk Scores, not methods. Calculated is not a standard risk scoring method in ServiceNow.

The most appropriate action is to configure the Risk Criteria in ServiceNow to align with the company‘s specific needs. This allows for accurate risk assessment and prioritization, ensuring the system reflects the organization‘s risk appetite and thresholds. According to ServiceNow documentation, administrators can tailor the Risk Criteria to align with specific organizational requirements. https://docs.servicenow.com/ja-JP/bundle/tokyo-governance-risk-compliance/page/product/grc-risk/concept/Administration.html

The sys_admin and policy owner have the necessary permissions to move a policy into the Review state. According to the expert comments, compliance managers, policy owners or members of the policy owning group can also perform this action.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a European Union law that applies to any company that processes personal data of individuals residing in the EU, regardless of the company‘s location. Therefore, the correct answer is that the company processes data from individuals in the European Union.

The Control Failure Factor contributes to the Calculated Risk Factor, which is determined by averaging the Indicator Failure Factor and the Control Failure Factor, as detailed in the ServiceNow documentation. Therefore, the impact of control failures is directly reflected in the Calculated Risk score. The formula is: Calculated Risk Factor = (Indicator failure factor + Control failure factor) / 2

While a ‘Very High‘ risk assessment outcome warrants attention, it doesn‘t automatically trigger issue creation. It typically leads to the development of a risk treatment plan. The textbook P286 confirms that a very high risk should trigger the risk treatment, not immediately issue creation. The other options are common and legitimate triggers for issue creation because they represent control failures, attestation failures, or direct actions by authorized personnel.

The Risk Developer role is not a standard role provided with the ServiceNow GRC application. The standard roles include Risk User, Risk Manager, and Risk Reader, which are used for various GRC-related tasks. Examining the sys_user_role table and filtering by roles containing ‘risk‘ and scoped to ‘grc‘ will confirm the absence of a ‘Risk Developer‘ role.

Policies transition through stages like Draft > Review > Awaiting approval > Published > Retired. In the Review state, reviewers have the option to send the policy back to Draft for adjustments or forward it for approval. Therefore, the correct answer is Review.

Registered Risks inherit Risk Scoring Values from the Risk Statement. After associating entity types to the risk statement, risks generated for each entity inherit the Risk Scoring values. This ensures consistency and efficient risk management. Verification steps include opening the risk statement record, associating entity types, and then confirming that the generated risks in the risk register have inherited the expected scoring values.

The correct sequence for the risk management lifecycle is Identify and Plan, Assess, Control, Review. This ensures a structured approach to managing risks, from initial awareness and planning to implementing controls and continuously evaluating their effectiveness.The Risk Management lifecycle includes the identification and planning phase. Risk assessment follows identification and planning, and includes analysis and evaluation. Control represents the respond and monitor phases of risk management. Review represents the continuous evaluation and improvements.

Controls are not weighted equally by default, and the weight of the Control is usually set when the Control is created or configured within the security framework.

Both the Compliance Manager and Compliance Admin roles have the necessary permissions to create policies. The Compliance User role lacks these permissions, while the Risk Manager‘s focus is primarily on risk assessment and mitigation, not policy creation. According to ServiceNow documentation, ‘Role required: sn_compliance.admin or sn_compliance.manager‘ to define a Policy.

The ‘Add to Update Set‘ utility is available for download from the ServiceNow Developer site. This site provides developers with tools and resources to enhance their ServiceNow development experience. The utility simplifies the process of adding changes to update sets, streamlining development workflows.

The Inherent and Residual Risk scores are derived from four key values: Impact, representing the potential severity of the risk; Likelihood, indicating the probability of the risk occurring; Single Loss Expectancy (SLE), which quantifies the expected financial loss from a single occurrence of the risk; and Annualized Rate of Occurrence (ARO), estimating the frequency with which the risk is expected to occur in a year. Default Scores form only impact is mentioned under Inherent/Residual SLE and only likeilhood is mentioned under Inherent/Residual ARO.

The Service Portal offers the most customizable and adaptable platform to provide users with an alternative experience for viewing policies, creating policy exceptions, and searching for controls within the ServiceNow ecosystem. It is also the OOB portal available to get catalog items.

GRC solutions are not typically implemented to solve issues within Customer Service or Help Desk organizations. Those issues are better addressed with CSM and ITSM solutions respectively. Typical customer scenarios include organizations with audit findings, those starting GRC programs from scratch, or those undertaking a full GRC transformation.

The sn_compliance_citation and sn_compliance_policy_statement tables directly inherit from the Content table, allowing them to leverage its features and attributes. Other tables, such as Issue and Risk, do not directly extend the content table.

The GRC Workbench is the dependency modeling feature used to build relationships between Entity Classes in the Classic UI. Refer to the official ServiceNow documentation for GRC Workbench. https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/utah-governance-risk-compliance/page/product/grc-common/task/create-relationships-between-profile-classes.html

The content table (sn_grcs_content) is a parent table of sn_risk_definition. Content[sn_grc_content] extending to following tables: Citation[sn_complance_citation], Control object requirement[sn_compliance_policy_statement], Risk Statment[sn_risk_definition], Control object[sn_compliance_policy_statement]

The Compliance User (sn_compliance.user) and Compliance Manager (sn_compliance.manager) roles have the necessary permissions to create policies. The Compliance Admin (sn_compliance.admin) role can also create policies. Audit User, Risk User and Compliance Reader roles do not have these permissions.

The ′sn_risk_risk.form′ syntax displays a form to create a new record in the Risk table within the content frame, which aligns with the request for the default form view behavior (creating a new record). ′sn_risk_risk.list′ displays the list view in the content frame, while ′sn_risk_risk.LIST′ and ′sn_risk_risk.FORM′ opens the list or form in a new tab.

To integrate with a provider RSS feed, you need to set up a Feed sources record, a Provider record, and a Connection and Credentials record. The Feed sources record defines the source, the Provider record identifies the provider, and the Connection and Credentials record handles authentication. Regulatory Feed Record is the output. Regulatory Change Task is auto created if the feed is applicable (ebook pages 191 and 192)

The assessment context in RAM offers two primary options: Risk and Object. ‘Risk‘ focuses the assessment on individual risk records, while ‘Object‘ broadens the scope to encompass configuration items or other objects. These options help define the focus and scope of the risk assessment within the RAM framework.

The primary prerequisite for generating a control test task is the presence of controls associated with the entity being scoped, along with defined test plans. This ensures that there is a specific activity to be tested and instructions on how to test it. Other factors like engagement scope and risk assessments contribute to the broader context but are not directly responsible for the task generation.

The individuals directly involved in GRC implementations are typically ServiceNow platform experts who configure the platform, risk and compliance experts who ensure alignment with regulations and best practices, and the CMDB process owner who maintains the underlying data infrastructure supporting GRC processes. While the Board of Directors, Chief Executive, and HR analysts are stakeholders, they typically aren‘t directly involved in the day-to-day implementation activities.

The cmn_location table is useful for linking entities to physical locations. The core_company table is commonly used to represent the company or organization an entity belongs to. cmn_department only holds a list of departments within a company.

Interviewing personnel, performing walkthroughs to understand control design, and conducting control testing to assess effectiveness are the three tasks most associated with the Audit module in a GRC platform. Control Attestation is for control owners. Tabletop exercises and Remediation are usually performed in the Risk module.

The ComplianceScoreCalculator script include (or potentially ComplianceScoreCalculatorBase, which it calls) handles the calculation of compliance scores. Modifying this script include will allow you to change how the compliance scores are rolled up.

The Risk Assessment Methodology [sn_risk_advanced_risk_assessment_methodology] and Factor [sn_risk_advanced_factor] tables are key tables in the GRC Advanced Risk application. The former helps in structuring risk assessments, while the latter helps in defining and managing factors influencing risks.

The correct answer is A. Control Objective [sn_compliance_policy_statement]. UCF import controls are stored in the UCF Control [sn_comp_ucf_control] table and mapped to the ServiceNow GRC Control Objective [sn_compliance_policy_statement] table. This mapping can be found by examining the sys_transform_map list view, filtering for source_table=sn_comp_ucf_control.

After a control undergoes attestation, it automatically moves to the Review state. The control lifecycle follows the path: Draft > Attest > Review > Monitor > Retired. The Review state allows for an evaluation of the attestation findings to determine the next steps.

EMEA Data Centers represents a collection or classification of data centers, not a single, specific data center. Therefore, it‘s best described as an Entity Type. A specific data center, like ‘London Data Center‘, would be an example of a single entity.

The sn_compliance manager role is the minimum role required to approve a Policy. Compliance users can create new policies and request policy exceptions, but they cannot approve policies. Admin role also has the access, but the question asks for the minimum role.

Compliance Manager and System Administrator roles typically have the necessary permissions to manually transition a control to the ‘Monitor‘ state. Compliance Managers are directly involved in control management, and System Administrators may have broader access that allows them to perform this action.

The GRC: Profiles Application includes tables like Entity (sn_grc_profile), Control/Risk (sn_grc_item), and Entity Type (sn_grc_profile_type). However, sn_grc_risk is not a standard table in the GRC: Profiles application scope. Therefore, the correct answer is D.

The Control Weight is the factor that allows you to modify the contribution of a specific control to the overall compliance score. By increasing or decreasing the weight, you can emphasize or de-emphasize the importance of that control in the overall compliance assessment.

The GRC: Policy and Compliance Management scoped application includes the Policy table (sn_compliance_policy), the Control Objective table (sn_compliance_policy_statement) and the Citation table (sn_compliance_citation). The other options are either part of a different application (GRC: Profiles) or might not exist.

The correct answers are Item, Content and Document as they are parent tables for the GRC: Risk Management tables.

The Item, Document, and Content tables are all parent tables within the GRC: Profiles application scope and are extensible. The Indicator table is also present in GRC: Profiles but is not extensible, making it the exception.

When responding to consolidated attestations, a user can either provide different responses for each individual assessment or provide the same response for all assessments in the group. This functionality allows for flexibility and efficiency in the attestation process. https://docs.servicenow.com/en-US/bundle/vancouver-governance-risk-compliance/page/product/grc-policy-and-compliance/concept/c_Attestations.html

Entity scoping plays a key role in GRC implementations by enabling automatic control generation (Option A), standardizing risk and control setup (Option B), and dynamically updating the entity list (Option D). It ensures that controls are applied consistently and efficiently across relevant organizational elements.