Most organizations don’t suffer from a lack of controls. They suffer from a lack of focus. Every year, internal audit and controls teams pour time into testing environments filled with duplicative, outdated, or low-impact controls all in the name of coverage.
But coverage isn’t the same as protection. And when teams are spread thin proving the same things year after year, it’s easy to lose sight of why testing matters in the first place.
Exhausted Teams, Unchanged Outcomes
Audit fatigue doesn’t just hit the second line. It hits the business too.
Controls testing is disruptive by nature. It requires documentation, interviews, follow-ups, and sometimes awkward conversations. That’s all justifiable when the control in question actually mitigates a meaningful risk.
But when teams are asked to validate minor checks that don’t reflect today’s priorities, the process starts to feel arbitrary. Business units begin to see audit as a hoop to jump through, not a source of insight or support. And auditors themselves risk burnout chasing evidence that doesn’t matter.
In the end, everyone loses time and no one gains confidence.
The Legacy of “More Is Better”
This problem usually stems from legacy thinking: the idea that more controls equal more control. So the inventory grows. New controls are added, but old ones are rarely retired. Frameworks are followed without considering whether they still reflect the way the business actually operates.
And when it’s time to test, many teams take the path of least resistance: recycle last year’s plan.
This might feel safe. But it’s also how low-impact controls stay on the radar while emerging risks stay in the dark.
Risk-Driven Testing Starts with Relevance
A smarter testing program doesn’t start with a spreadsheet. It starts with a conversation about risk.
What’s changed in the business? Where are we seeing near misses or process failures? What are regulators and stakeholders most concerned about right now?
Testing should reflect real risk exposure, not just inherited documentation. That means reassessing control relevance regularly, and being willing to stop testing controls that no longer serve a purpose.
Some won’t like this. It might feel like letting go of assurance. But the opposite is true – narrowing your scope to the controls that actually matter gives you more assurance, not less.
Making the Shift from Exhaustion to Insight
Recalibrating a control testing program doesn’t mean abandoning rigor. It means focusing rigor where it counts.
Start by mapping your controls to clear risk objectives. Remove or de-prioritize controls that don’t meaningfully reduce those risks. Rethink testing cadence — not everything needs to be tested annually. And bring business stakeholders into the conversation, so they understand why the focus is shifting and where their input matters.
Most importantly, make this a living process. The relevance of a control isn’t static. It depends on context, and your testing plan should evolve as that context changes.
Testing Isn’t the Goal — Confidence Is
At the end of the day, control testing is a means to an end. The goal isn’t a thick audit report. It’s confidence. Confidence in your processes, in your defenses, and in your ability to catch what matters before it becomes a headline.
Want to streamline your control testing and focus on what counts? Let’s talk.