Security teams are faced with increasing requests with more tools, more data and higher expectations than ever. Advice approves major security budgets, but always ask the same question: what is the company in return? CISOs respond with reports on controls and vulnerability counts – but managers want to understand the risks in terms of financial exposure, operational impact and loss avoidance.
Disconnection has become difficult to ignore. The average cost of a violation reached $ 4.88 million, according to Recent IBM data. This figure reflects not only the response of incidents, but also time of downtime, lost productivity, the attrition of the customer and the prolonged efforts required to restore operations and confidence. The fallout is rarely limited to safety.
Security leaders need a model that promotes these consequences before surfaceing. An assessment of commercial value (BVA) offers this model. It connects exposures at the cost, the prioritization of return and prevention with tangible value.
This article will explain how a BVA works, what it measures and why it becomes essential for organizations that understand that cybersecurity is a key commercial function, not just a computer problem.
Why security measures no longer translate
Most security measures have been designed for operational teams, not business leaders. The number of cve, the rate of fixes and the cover of the tools help to follow the progress, but they do not answer the questions which count on the board of directors: what would really be a violation? What risk have we removed the table? Where does this investment make a difference?
Traditional metrics are not below for some key reasons:
- They show an activity, not an impact. To say that 3,000 vulnerabilities were set in the last quarter does not explain if one of them was linked to systems that count. This tells you what has been done – not what has become safer. (If you want to know more about this subject, consult our recent webinar Above – he is filled with knowledge not to be missed on how the metrics of vanity will understand your security posture, and what to do on this subject. ))
- They miss how the exhibitions connect. A bad configuration can be minor until it combines with an identity problem or a flat network segment. Most measures do not reflect how attackers chain the weaknesses to achieve critical assets.
- They leave aside the financial consequences. Violation costs are not a single size. They depend on everything, the detection time and the type of data to the complexity of the cloud and the personnel gaps – the factors that most dashboards never touch.
A BVA helps to fill the gap between the technical results and what the company must really understand. It connects exposure data to financial impact, using the modeling of violation costs based on real world research. The evaluations must be based on sources contributions such as the IBM cost of a data violation report, which describes the factors that shape the cost of an incident – of the speed with which a violation is detected in the complexity of the IT environment. IBM uses these factors to analyze the costs of a violation after the fact – but they can also be used to project what it could cost in advancebased on the real posture of the organization.
This is where a BVA comes into play. Rather than following the measurements at the surface level, it refreshes cybersecurity in terms of results. It moves the conversation. It goes from the remedies counting to the amounts. It offers a clear image of how exhibitions lead to impact, to what is at stake and where safety investments can offer measurable value. This gives security leaders the context they need to support decisions with confidence.
Assessment of commercial value: what it measures
It is one thing to say that a risk has been reduced. It is another to show what it means in dollars, in time or in commercial impact. This is what BVA is designed to do. It connects the points between the safety work and the results whose rest of the company really cares. A BVA should focus on three things:
- Avoid costs – What would a violation be likely depending on the risks in your environment, and what part can be prevented by repairing the right exposures?
- Cost reduction – Where can security efforts help reduce expenses? This could include reducing the scope of manual tests, reducing the correction of general costs or improving your insurance profile by showing better risk posture.
- Efficiency gains – How long and effort can you save by giving your team better priorities and automating what does not need a human touch?
These real world figures help the security managers to plan better, to spend more intelligently and to plead in case of cases when decisions or budgets are at stake.
Why delay and inaction cost more than you think
The financial impact of a violation increases with each day behind. Incidents involving identity -based exhibitions or shadow data now take more than 290 days to contain. Meanwhile, companies are losing a loss of income, staller operations and prolonged reputation damage. In addition, the IBM report shows that 70% of violations lead to a major operational disruption – many of them never recover completely.
A BVA brings clarity to this chronology. It identifies the exhibitions most likely to extend an incident and estimates the cost of this delay according to your industry and your organizational profile. It also helps to assess the return of preemptive controls. For example, IBM noted that companies that deploy effective automation and IA -based sanitation see violation costs drop up to $ 2.2 million.
Some organizations hesitate to act when the value is not clearly defined. This delay has a cost. A BVA should include a “cost of doing nothing” model that believes the monthly loss that a company takes by leaving untreated exhibitions. We found that for a large company, this cost can exceed half a million dollars.
But understanding the cost of inaction is only half of the battle. To really change the results, security managers must use this understanding to guide the strategy and create interfunctional support.
The main thing: from expenses to strategy, BVA strengthens alignment
There is no doubt about how security teams do the work. The problem is that traditional metrics do not always show what their work means. The corrective counts and the cover of the tools are not what cares about the boards. They want to know what is really protected. A BVA helps connect the points – showing how daily safety efforts help the company avoid losses, save time and remain more resilient.
It also facilitates difficult conversations. Whether it is to justify a budget, to browse the board of directors or to answer questions from insurers, a BVA gives security managers something solid to indicate. He shows where the team makes a difference – reduce occupied work, reduce third -party tests and improve the way the organization manages the risk.
And above all, that makes everyone on the same wavelength. Security, IT and finance do not have to guess the priorities of the other. They can work from the same figures, focus on what really matters and move faster when it counts.
It is this change that makes the real difference. Security ceases to be the team that says “no” and is starting to be the team that helps the company move forward. With a BVA, leadership finally has a clear way to see progress, make smarter decisions and face the risks before it becomes something bigger.
*****
Do you want to see what a BVA can tell you about the risk in your organization? Discover the Cyber-Roi XM calculator And start to understand how to avoid losses, save time and stay more resilient.
Note: This expert article was brought by David Lettvin, Inside Channel Account Manager, XM Cyber.