If your controls list reads like it was written in code, no wonder no one uses it.
Controls are supposed to keep your organization safe.
But too often, they’re just vague, technical-sounding blurbs buried in spreadsheets or locked away in policy binders. No one’s quite sure what they mean, who owns them, or whether they’re still relevant.
And that’s a problem.
Because when controls aren’t clear, they’re not followed. And when they’re not followed, they’re useless — even if they look great on paper during an audit.
The Clarity Test
Here’s a simple gut check:
Could someone outside of risk or compliance read your control and understand what to do?
If not, you don’t have a control. You have a liability.
The goal isn’t just to “have a control”, it’s to have one that works. That means it needs to be:
- Specific enough to act on
- Written in plain language
- Linked to a real owner
- Validated with actual evidence
- Reviewed regularly for relevance
Too often, controls are either too high-level (“Access is restricted”) or too granular (“Review log files for anomalous events on port 443 within 48 hours”). Either way, they miss the mark. Teams need just enough detail to act, not enough to drown in.
From Checklist to Behavior
Great controls don’t live in a spreadsheet. They live in the flow of work.
They guide behavior, trigger alerts, prompt decisions. They’re embedded into tools, tied to processes, and felt (not just documented). When that happens, they stop being passive obligations and start becoming active safeguards.
A usable control is one that’s designed for the people who need to follow it. Not the auditor. Not the framework. The actual people doing the work.
If you want controls that people understand, follow, and improve — start by writing them like you mean it.
Want to make your controls more than checkboxes?
👉 empoweredsystems.com
