Certified: The CISM Prepcast

Welcome to The Bare Metal Cyber CISM Prepcast. This series helps you prepare for the exam with focused explanations and practical context.
Security documentation is not complete with just policies. To move from strategic direction to operational execution, organizations must also develop well-structured procedures and guidelines. Each of these document types plays a distinct role within the information security documentation hierarchy. Policies define what must be done. They express leadership intent and establish non-negotiable requirements. Procedures explain how those requirements are carried out in practice. They provide detailed, sequential instructions for executing specific tasks or controls.
Guidelines, by contrast, offer recommended practices. They are advisory in nature and intended for situations where judgment or flexibility is appropriate. While procedures are mandatory and enforceable, guidelines support decision-making without requiring a fixed approach. These distinctions matter. If procedures are treated like policies, teams may lack room to adapt. If guidelines are treated like procedures, critical tasks may be left incomplete. Clarity between document types supports both compliance and agility—and CISM professionals must ensure all three are aligned and layered properly within governance documentation.
Security procedures serve a vital purpose in daily operations. They translate policy into practice by detailing the steps necessary to comply with a given requirement. Whether it’s revoking access for terminated employees or configuring firewall rules, procedures provide step-by-step guidance. This ensures that security-related tasks are completed consistently and correctly, even by staff who may not be technical experts. Procedures reduce variability, support repeatability, and promote operational discipline.
They also enhance accountability by clearly defining who is responsible for each step. In the context of audits or investigations, documented procedures serve as authoritative references. They demonstrate not only that the organization had intent, but that it followed through with documented, repeatable processes. Procedures are also useful in training scenarios, helping new employees understand how to perform secure tasks from day one.
Guidelines should be used when flexibility is needed. In areas where technologies are rapidly changing or where risk varies by business unit, rigid step-by-step instructions may not be practical. Guidelines offer general direction without dictating exact actions. They are valuable in settings where judgment plays a role—for example, selecting secure cloud vendors, managing non-standard endpoints, or configuring security settings for specialized systems.
In these cases, guidelines serve as a starting point. They provide best practices and things to consider but leave room for context-specific adaptation. Guidelines are especially useful in fast-evolving technology domains where prescriptive documentation becomes outdated quickly. Even so, they must align with the organization’s risk tolerance and policy goals. They should be developed with the same level of care as procedures, even if their function is advisory rather than mandatory.
To be effective, every procedure must follow a logical structure. Begin with a clear title and scope. The title should identify the task, and the scope should define which systems, departments, or roles the procedure applies to. The purpose section describes why the procedure exists and how it relates to a broader policy. This context reinforces relevance and helps users understand the “why” behind the “how.”
Next, list prerequisites. These are the conditions, access rights, or tools required before starting the task. Then provide step-by-step instructions. These should be numbered, concise, and ordered sequentially. Avoid ambiguity. Use consistent formatting, and where necessary, reference specific screens, commands, or file paths. Finally, include a roles and responsibilities section to clarify who performs each step and who approves, verifies, or escalates actions if problems arise.
Actionable procedures must be written in direct, unambiguous language. Avoid passive voice and complex sentence structures. Assume that users will read quickly and possibly under stress—especially if the procedure relates to incident response. Terminology should be consistent across all documents. If a term is used in one procedure, use the same term elsewhere to avoid confusion.
Focus on clarity and completeness. Procedures are not the place for lengthy background explanations or theoretical discussions. If necessary, include troubleshooting notes or verification points that allow users to confirm they’ve completed steps successfully. When referencing specific tools, include screen names, command syntax, or URLs to help users navigate directly to the relevant resource.
Consistency is vital across all procedure documents. Use standardized templates for layout and formatting. This not only improves readability but also ensures that no key sections are missed. Templates should include space for version numbers, approval history, contact information for questions, and references to related documents. Headers, bullet points, and formatting should follow organization-wide documentation standards.
Documents should be stored in centralized repositories with proper access controls. Staff must be able to find and use the correct version of a procedure without confusion. Ensure formatting is compatible with both desktop and mobile platforms. This supports field workers, remote teams, and emergency access during incidents.
Procedure development should be collaborative. Involve the teams that will actually use the procedure. These operational users know the real-world steps, exceptions, and system quirks that static documentation often overlooks. Include input from IT, security, and compliance teams to ensure accuracy and alignment with controls and regulations.
Before publishing, validate procedures through walk-through testing. Have someone follow the instructions exactly as written and report any gaps or ambiguities. Resolve discrepancies between documented procedures and actual practices. Document feedback, and use it to improve clarity and accuracy. Review cycles should include multiple iterations if necessary, with input from all affected stakeholders.
Procedures must be reviewed and updated regularly. Formal review intervals should be set based on risk level or operational dependency. For example, access provisioning procedures may be reviewed annually, while procedures for legacy systems may be reviewed after any major system change. Triggers for unscheduled updates include tool upgrades, new threats, or audit findings. If a procedure no longer reflects current practices, it must be revised or retired to avoid confusion.
Maintain an audit trail. Track who made updates, what was changed, and why. Archived versions should be retained according to document retention policies. When updates occur, communicate them to the affected users. This can include email notices, team briefings, or in-application alerts. Unannounced changes to procedures reduce effectiveness and can lead to noncompliance.
Communication and training ensure that procedures are followed. Training should be part of onboarding for new employees and required when individuals change roles. Use tabletop exercises or simulations to reinforce familiarity, especially for procedures tied to incident response. Incorporate procedures into broader awareness campaigns to reinforce routine practices like secure password management or acceptable use.
Monitor usage patterns. Are staff using the correct procedure? Is it available and easy to find? Collect feedback to identify areas of confusion or difficulty. Job aids, quick-reference cards, or visual guides can be helpful for complex tasks or high-risk operations. These supplemental materials make it easier for employees to apply procedures accurately in time-sensitive situations.
Procedures must also be integrated into the organization’s control framework. Each procedure should map to one or more control objectives. For example, a procedure for patch management supports the control objective of maintaining system integrity. Procedures help demonstrate compliance. Auditors often ask not only for the policy but also for proof that tasks are performed in a consistent, documented way.
Link procedures to risk indicators and performance metrics. Use them to validate incident response timelines, control effectiveness, or audit coverage. Dashboards and GRC platforms can display procedural performance alongside other key risk indicators. Where procedures fail or are bypassed, that information should be reviewed and used to update documentation and training. Treat procedures as living documents that reflect the organization’s evolving systems, processes, and threat landscape.
Well-crafted procedures and guidelines are key to bridging strategy and execution. They make policies real. They enable risk treatment, enforce control, and support incident response. CISM professionals must lead the development of documentation that is not only accurate and compliant but also usable. Whether for compliance, training, or day-to-day operations, effective procedures make security manageable and repeatable.
Thanks for joining us for this episode of The Bare Metal Cyber CISM Prepcast. For more episodes, tools, and study support, visit us at Bare Metal Cyber dot com.