The governance gap
Only 4% of ASX 100 directors have IT backgrounds[3], yet boards carry ultimate accountability for technology risk. With the average data breach now costing $4.44 million globally[4], that gap is no longer tolerable.
APRA CPS 234 requires boards to maintain information security capability commensurate with risk profile[1]. The AICD provides similar guidance[2]. Yet most boards lack the technical depth to verify either is being met.
What every board should ask quarterly
- Service performance: are we meeting our SLAs, and where are the systematic misses?
- Security posture: which CPS 234 controls exist in evidence (not slide deck), and which are aspirational?
- Vendor concentration: what percentage of operational risk sits with a single provider?
- Cost trajectory: is technology spend tracking forecast within the 76% accuracy benchmark[5]?
- Cyber incident readiness: when was the last live tabletop, and what did it reveal?
- Governance trail: do board minutes reflect substantive technology decisions or rubber-stamping?
How to read the answers
A management team that cannot crisply answer these questions in plain English is not necessarily incompetent, but they almost certainly need independent oversight. The role of independent technology advisory is to give the board a translation layer between operational technology reality and director-grade decision-making.