When I add a new assignee to a treatment plan for a specified risk, they should automatically be added as access members of the risk. This will allow them to review the context of the risk and their respective treatment plan. The same process should apply to any registers or tasks.
The new risk dashboard is a welcomed addition. I find it almost useful. A few improvements will make it fully useful:
Risk Dashboard tab:
As discussed with Ryan & Cindy, We are using '6Clicks' Risks Registers Dev API. However, we have found out that there are few columns/fields missing and Ryan has confirmed back saying they are missing and needs to raise a 'Feature requests' from our end. Here are the missing columns we needed into this API are as follows:
'Access Members',
‘Control Name 1’ ,
'Control Owner'
'Control Owner 1'
If I am an administrator of a hub and I am within a spoke that I am an advisor for, I should be able to see support links within the spoke environment. There are some situations when trying to report a bug, where I actively have to navigate away from the bug to the hub level just so that I can open the reporting mechanism. By this point, I have lost my reference point to the bug, limiting the information I can provide. It is also a disruptive workflow when looking to consult the Knowledge Base when implementing something at the spoke level.
Currently to edit lists within custom fields, users must double click the correct field row. Conscious that every other modification to a field has a UI element, I think an additional ribbon option, such as 'modify field attributes' or an addition of a clearly clickable element to modify attributes of a custom field would be a great improvement to minimise user confusion and maintain consistency with other UI elements.
You should be able to rearrange the ordering of fields within a widget.
On the QBA results page, a new option 'Partially compliant' is made available in the 'Compliance status' dropdown in order to review the responses as partially compliant if it meets the criteria partially.
Total of 4 options will be available in the 'Compliance status' dropdown -
For SOX compliance we're performing quarterly Access Recertifications. Whilst recurring quarterly, the actual work needs to be done within a 30 day window at the end of the quarter.
Currently new tasks for assignees are generated as the previous due date expires... which for this use case is 2 months too early.
Having a 'Start Date' (perhaps set relative to the Due Date - e.g. 30 days before due date), with assignee tasks generated on that date, would make things soooo much smoother!
Thanks team.
Admins can now assign 'Spokes to User-groups' (Hub only) which would ensure that all the users within those user-groups automatically become Advisor for those spokes.
Our poor 3rd parties are sick of doing Vendor Risk Assessments annually and having to re-key all the data in (via 6Clicks Assessment), and in 6Clicks the ability for by default the form to be pre-filled from previous vendor response would make it a much easier sell to get their current status. Allow for select fields to be excluded where we want a new response (I wouldn't use this, but some clients may). It would also mean we could analyse quickly were a vendor response has changed from last year and just look at the exceptions!
Add the stage access and stage requirements from risk workflows to the issue/incident workflow (and other workflows that are added in future).
This would add more options to incident management and allow for mandating certain fields be completed before stage change (e.g. closure).
While system fields such as “Risk owners” and “Access members” effectively differentiate between users and groups, custom fields currently lack this functionality.
To enhance user experience and reduce confusion, it would be beneficial to implement a clear indication of whether a selected value from the dropdown menu is a user or a group. This improvement would align custom fields with the existing system fields’ practice and provide a more intuitive interface.
Adding support for skipped questions in the Assessment's Pixel perfect templated reporting.
Similar to Risk Treatment Plan permissions, Admins will have an ability to grant permissions to only view Project & Playbook tasks
When a Risk treatment plan (RTP) is closed, the controls linked to the RTP are linked to risk automatically.