is the set of all line managers in the organization
is the subset of line managers that have not completed their recertification
is the subset of line managers that have completed their recertification and revoked 0 access rights
is the access right revocation threshold above which revocations are considered abnormally high
is the subset of line managers that have completed their recertification and revoked between 1 and access rights inclusive
is the subset of line managers that have completed their recertification and revoked more than access rights
are exclusive subsets
is the set cardinality function
The indicator is composed of the following series:
No Recert
Recert 0
Recert Normal
Recert High
Parameters
We recommend to initially set and adapt it if necessary.
Benchmarking
This indicator is adequate for benchmarking given comparable recertification scopes and value.
Rationale
The objective of this indicator is to measure the effectiveness of the LM Recertification process.
No Recert shows the ratio of line managers who failed to complete their recertification duty. This must be maintained as low as possible.
Recert 0 shows the ratio of line managers who completed their recertification duty but revoked 0 access rights. Two distinct causes may explain this result: 1) access rights were optimal and did not require any change or 2) the line manager ticked the boxes without due care. Further inquiry may be required to distinguish between the two.
Recert Normal shows the ratio of line managers who completed their recertification duty and revoked a number of access rights that is within expectations.
Recert Highshows the ratio of line managers who completed their recertification duty and revoked an abnormally high number of access rights. A one time high may be caused by changes in the organization. But if the situation persists, this may reflect an inefficient setup where line managers must continuously adapt access rights. A root cause may be that RBAC is not implemented or improperly implemented.
In certain circumstances, the economical benefits of automation may be unjustifiable (e.g.: when processing low volumes of IAM artifacts on non-sensitive IT systems). Pursuing this indicator blindly could lead to economical waste.
Poorly implemented automation may lead to new risks, e.g. silent automation errors leading to a false sense of security, automation mechanisms that are vulnerable to compromission or lead to denial of service.
Data Sources
IAM System
Typical Frequency
Same frequency than recertification campaigns. Often quarterly, half-yearly or annually.