
Advisory practice
Most organisations do not lack policies. They lack a working operating model — one where every risk has an owner, every obligation has a control, and every control produces evidence someone will review. That is what we build.
In this practice
+1 more service in this practice

What we usually find
Outcomes
Agreed taxonomy, scoring method, appetite thresholds and escalation routes — sized to your organisation rather than lifted from a textbook.
Every applicable regulatory and contractual requirement traced to a named control, a named owner and a review cadence.
Committee terms of reference, delegated authority, meeting cadence, decision records and action tracking that stand up to scrutiny.
A defined reporting pack — risk profile against appetite, control health, open findings, overdue actions — produced on a schedule, not on request.
What we deliver
Scoped individually or combined into a programme, depending on where you are starting from.
Risk taxonomy and domains, impact and likelihood scales, assessment methodology, appetite and tolerance statements, treatment and acceptance rules.
Facilitated workshops to identify and score risks against business objectives, then a populated register with treatment plans and accountable owners.
Analysis of the requirements that apply to you, gap assessment against current practice, and a prioritised remediation roadmap.
A defined process for detecting, assessing and routing regulatory change so obligations do not silently drift out of date.
Committee design, roles and responsibilities, delegated authority, RACI, escalation paths and the reporting calendar that connects them.
Consolidating duplicated controls across standards into a single control set, so one test satisfies multiple frameworks.
Deliverables
Named outputs, not a workstream description. Every item below is produced by this practice and can be reviewed in draft before it is finalised.
Risk taxonomy and domains, impact and likelihood scales, assessment methodology, appetite and tolerance statements, and escalation rules — approved and version-controlled.
Identified and scored risks with inherent and residual ratings, named owners, agreed treatment plans and review dates.
Every applicable regulatory and contractual requirement traced to a control, an owner and a review cadence, with the source clause referenced.
Current state against the target framework, with findings rated by severity and a prioritised, sequenced remediation roadmap.
Committee terms of reference, delegated authority matrix, roles and responsibilities, escalation paths and the reporting calendar that connects them.
A defined reporting template — risk profile against appetite, control health, open findings, overdue actions — with the data definitions behind each metric.
Our approach
Each stage produces something you can review before the next one starts. No stage depends on trusting that the previous one went well.
Objectives, structure, critical processes, existing frameworks and what leadership actually needs to see.
Document review, interviews and control walkthroughs to establish a defensible baseline rather than an assumed one.
Taxonomy, methodology, governance structure and reporting model — reviewed with the people who will run it before it is finalised.
Risks identified and scored, obligations mapped, controls assigned, treatment plans agreed with owners who accepted them.
Move the programme off documents and into a system with workflow, reminders and reporting — SecureGRC or your existing platform.
Training for the internal team, a first reporting cycle run alongside them, and a scheduled review point.
SecureGRC · technology enablement
A framework only holds if it stays live. SecureGRC carries the same structure we design — the taxonomy, the owners, the cadence — into a system that chases the work and reports on it.
Relevant platform capabilities
Common questions
Related practices

Next step
Tell us your current position, what has to be demonstrated and the date it is required by. You will receive a scoped approach with defined stages — not a generic proposal.