Elevate your audit and risk management: mastering integrated GRC frameworks
Because frameworks don't fail—assumptions about them do. This highly interactive course challenges the assumption that framework alignment equals risk coverage.
The uncomfortable truth about GRC maturity
• COSO and ISO 31000 were never designed to be "set and forget"—yet most organisations treat them exactly that way
• Your control framework may be technically compliant and fundamentally exposed at the same time
• The highest-profile failures (cyber breaches, fraud scandals, operational meltdowns) rarely stem from absent controls — they stem from controls that assumed rational actors in predictable environments
• Static GRC maturity is not stability — it is decay by another name
• If your last framework review predates your current threat landscape, you are managing yesterday's risks with yesterday's thinking.
Course overview
• Internal Audit professionals ready to move beyond checklist assurance
• Risk Managers who suspect their heat maps are missing the hottest risks
• Compliance leaders accountable for controls that must work under real-world conditions
• Anyone responsible for cyber, fraud, or operational resilience who has seen "adequate controls" fail catastrophically
- Cyber risk doesn't respect your control matrix—it exploits the gap between documented controls and actual human behaviour
- Behavioural risk is not a "soft" issue—it is the primary failure mode in high-consequence control breakdowns
- Regulators are moving beyond "do you have controls?" to "do your controls account for how people actually behave under pressure?"
- Organisations that rest on framework compliance without behavioural integration are introducing risk by design—not reducing it
- The illusion of GRC maturity may be your single greatest unmanaged risk.
Day One: Foundations under fire
• The evolution trap: How COSO and ISO 31000 excellence can become a barrier to actual risk reduction
• Framework integration as risk intelligence—not compliance theatre
• The Three Lines Model 2020: What "coordination" actually demands in practice
• Mapping the gaps: Where traditional control taxonomies systematically undercount behavioural risk
• The human element as control variable: Why "trained and aware" is not the same as "reliably compliant"
• Workshop: Stress-testing your current framework against behavioural failure scenarios.
Day Two: From assessment to assurance
• Control design evaluation reimagined: The questions your current methodology isn't asking
• Failure mode analysis: Identifying where immature GRC thinking embeds risk into the control architecture itself
• Cyber as the proving ground: Why behavioural risk integration is non-negotiable in high-profile threat domains
• Beyond preventive vs. detective: Designing for human variability, cognitive load, and pressure responses
• Quantifying what you've been ignoring: Resource allocation models that account for behavioural risk weighting
• Building the case internally: How to communicate GRC maturity gaps without triggering defensive compliance responses.
Professionalism
Performance
Leadership and communication.