Most data protection officers can’t answer a simple question: where does our organisation’s data actually live? This guide walks through why information asset management sits at the foundation of every other compliance activity — from your Record of Processing Activities to breach response and regulatory reporting — and what it takes to build an asset inventory that stays accurate instead of becoming another abandoned spreadsheet.
Fill in the form below to get your copy. For the full article version of this guide, see Information Asset Management: Why It’s Critical for Data Protection Compliance.
Information asset management is the process of identifying, documenting, tracking, and maintaining all data and information systems within an organisation. It creates a centralised inventory of where data exists, who accesses it, and how it flows through systems.
Effective asset management requires more than spreadsheets. It demands systematic processes, consistent terminology, and ongoing maintenance to ensure accuracy.
Most organisations lack a complete picture of their information assets. When data protection officers speak with teams across NHS trusts, healthcare providers, higher education institutions, and mid-market organisations, a consistent gap emerges. Teams cannot answer this fundamental question: where does our data actually live?
This knowledge gap isn’t a documentation problem. It’s a compliance vulnerability that affects breach response, incident investigation, and regulatory accountability.
Asset management sits at the intersection of operational reality and regulatory requirement. It remains chronically underfunded, under-resourced, and misunderstood despite being foundational to all compliance efforts.
The modern data environment has become exponentially more complex. Cloud storage platforms multiply data copies. Software-as-a-Service applications introduce new data flows. Legacy systems retain historical information. Third-party integrations create interdependencies. Departmental shadow IT creates invisible data repositories.
Organisations accumulate data at unprecedented velocity, yet most treat asset management as documentation rather than operational necessity.
Key challenges organisations face:
When breach incidents occur or data subject access requests are raised, organisations discover these gaps immediately. Response teams cannot quickly answer: Which departments stored affected data? How many copies exist? Who has access? When was data scheduled for deletion?
Without rapid answers, organisations cannot respond effectively to regulators or data subjects.
Data Protection Officers operate under intense pressure. They hold accountability for compliance across entire organisations yet typically lead teams of one, two, or three people. This ratio creates an untenable situation where DPOs must understand operational reality across departments they don’t manage.
The DPO dilemma:
Without asset clarity, DPOs become reactive firefighters addressing immediate crises rather than proactive stewards building compliance infrastructure.
With asset management, DPOs shift from chaos to control. They move from sending emails chasing spreadsheets to accessing centralised asset inventories. They shift from improvised responses to systematic processes.
Information asset management enables DPOs to delegate appropriately. Rather than being the single person holding all compliance knowledge, DPOs can empower Information Asset Managers and departmental teams to maintain data ownership. This transforms the DPO’s role from operational execution to governance and oversight.
Real example: One of our NHS ICB clients successfully implemented this model. By establishing clear asset ownership across departments and centralising information within a structured platform, they reduced DPO maintenance burden whilst improving accuracy. Teams became invested in documentation because they retained operational control.
This approach doesn’t work in isolation. It requires integration across the entire compliance programme.
Multiple regulatory frameworks now explicitly mandate asset management. Understanding these requirements clarifies why this practice has become essential.
These frameworks exist because organisations that lose control of information assets simultaneously lose control of their security and compliance posture.
Practical scenario: An organisation collects customer data through a web form. Data flows into a CRM system. The CRM syncs to an email marketing platform. The marketing platform retains backups for 90 days post-deletion. An employee exports records to a personal folder. Without asset mapping, the organisation cannot accurately describe processing activities, assess risks, or respond confidently to data subject rights requests.
Third-party risk management also depends on asset clarity. When organisations transfer processing to vendors or share data with partners, they must understand what assets are involved. Without this clarity, vendor assessments become guesswork.
| Aspect | Spreadsheets | Centralised Management |
|---|---|---|
| Data Accuracy | Frequently outdated within weeks | Consistently current with RoPA updates |
| Duplicate Detection | Manual review, high error rate | Automated consolidation with system rules |
| Access Control | Limited, version control problems | Role-based access with audit trails |
| Reporting Capability | Static reports requiring manual compilation | Real-time dashboards and automated exports |
| Integration | Disconnected from compliance workflows | Connected to risk management, ROPA, incident response and Data Management Frameworks |
| Scalability | Becomes unmanageable above 200 assets | Handles thousands of assets efficiently |
| Compliance Evidence | Difficult to demonstrate systematic approach | Clear audit trail of governance activities |
| Team Efficiency | DPO handles 80% of asset work | DPO handles 20%, teams maintain own assets |
Organisations consistently encounter predictable obstacles when establishing asset management programmes.
These barriers explain why many organisations have abandoned asset management initiatives. Overcoming them requires systematic approaches and appropriate technology.
Information asset management shouldn’t exist in isolation. It must integrate within a broader data protection platform connecting asset information to risk assessment, compliance workflows, and stakeholder reporting.
The ProvePrivacy platform includes an integrated Information Asset Module designed specifically to address these operational barriers. It is populated from the RoPA meaning there is no separate management task. Rather than creating another disconnected documentation tool, the module functions within a collaborative ecosystem.
ProvePrivacy’s approach:
Asset information becomes part of a single source of truth. DPOs and teams rely on this centralised inventory to demonstrate compliance effectively.
The platform prioritises simplicity over complexity. Teams without deep technical backgrounds contribute asset information through straightforward workflows. The system handles consolidation and ensures consistency automatically.
ProvePrivacy’s collaborative model empowers operational teams to maintain ownership of their information whilst giving compliance teams visibility and control. This shifts asset management from compliance department responsibility to organisation-wide accountability.
This integration transforms asset management from a documentation exercise into operational infrastructure supporting all compliance activities.
Implementing effective asset management requires deliberate planning and systematic execution.
Step One: Current State Assessment
Begin by understanding what you currently know and don’t know about your organisation’s information assets (your RoPA should be a great place to start). Conduct a rapid discovery process. Identify major data repositories. Map existing documentation across departments.
Step Two: Stakeholder Engagement
Engage information asset owners across departments. Establish clear roles and responsibilities. Ensure teams understand why asset management matters to their operations.
Step Three: Baseline Establishment
Work with key departments to establish baseline asset records. Focus initially on high-risk data categories. Use templates to ensure consistency.
Step Four: Systematic Processes
Implement processes for ongoing maintenance. Define how asset information gets updated when systems change. Establish review cycles. Create clear deprecation procedures.
Step Five: Platform Integration
Integrate asset information with your existing compliance programme rather than creating isolated documentation. Connect asset data to your Risk Register. Link it to your Record of Processing Activities. Use asset information in incident response workflows.
Organisations that prioritise these steps build compliance foundations deliberately. They treat asset management as operational infrastructure rather than compliance documentation.
Q: How many information assets does a typical organisation have?
A: This varies significantly. Small organisations may have 50-100 assets. Mid-market organisations typically have 200-500. Large enterprises often manage thousands. Asset count reflects business complexity and data management maturity.
Q: How often should asset information be updated?
A: Asset records should be reviewed and updated minimally annually. High-risk assets should be reviewed quarterly. When significant system changes occur, updates should happen immediately.
Q: Who should own information assets?
A: Business departments should own assets they use operationally. Information Asset Managers within IT or governance should coordinate and consolidate. Data Protection Officers provide oversight without daily operational responsibility.
Q: Can existing CMDB (Configuration Management Database) systems serve as asset inventories?
A: CMDBs and information asset inventories serve different purposes. CMDBs focus on technical specifications and dependencies. Asset management focuses on data, ownership, and compliance. Many organisations use both systems together.
Q: How does asset management support incident response?
A: During breach incidents, asset data enables rapid identification of affected systems, data categories, access logs, and individuals to notify. This accelerates investigation and regulatory notification.
Want a copy of this guide to work through offline, or to hear practitioners debate these challenges directly? Download the companion guide, watch our webinar recording on managing data assets, or read the five key takeaways on IAR, RoPA and stakeholder buy-in from the DPN panel discussion.
In a recent survey we conducted, 48% of respondents identified data retention and deletion policies as one of the biggest data compliance challenges they currently face. While this may suggest uncertainty around policy design, the reality for many organisations is different.
Most organisations already have retention and deletion policies in place. The real challenge lies in ensuring those policies are supported by clear, repeatable processes that make them effective in practice.
Under regulations such as the GDPR, organisations are required not only to define how long personal data is retained, but to ensure it is deleted when it is no longer necessary. Having a policy alone is not sufficient — organisations must be able to demonstrate how that policy is implemented and enforced.
Policy vs Process: An Important Distinction
Without documented procedures, retention policies risk becoming theoretical. This gap often emerges during audits, regulatory enquiries, or data subject access requests, when organisations are asked to evidence how data is deleted in line with stated timeframes.
A Common Example: Email Retention
Email is one of the most common areas where policy and process diverge.
An organisation may have a policy stating that emails are deleted after six months. However, key operational questions are often left unanswered:
Without a defined process, emails may be retained indefinitely, increasing both compliance risk and data exposure.
Why Process Matters for GDPR Compliance
The GDPR places emphasis on accountability and demonstrability. Organisations must be able to show that retention limits are enforced consistently across systems and data types.
This requires:
Where these elements are missing, organisations may believe they are compliant while unknowingly retaining personal data beyond permitted periods.
Moving Beyond Policy-Only Compliance
The survey results highlight that retention and deletion remain challenging not because policies are absent, but because execution is complex, but it doesn’t need to be.
Effective data retention compliance requires policy and process to work together. Policies define intent, but procedures, systems, and accountability are what turn that intent into consistent, defensible practice.
For organisations looking to strengthen their GDPR compliance posture, the focus should be not just on what the policy says — but on how it is carried out, monitored, and evidenced every day.
The ProvePrivacy platform has been developed to provide key features to help organisations manage, monitor and evidence data protection compliance. This includes a retention schedule to help manage the process of data retention. Book a demo to see the ProvePrivacy platform in action.
Avoiding the Common Pitfalls of Data Sharing Risks
In our interconnected world, data sharing is crucial for business operations and personal interactions. Whether sharing customer information, collaborating with partners, or using cloud services, data is always on the move. However, this convenience comes with the responsibility to ensure data is shared securely and responsibly.
In data protection terms there are two considerations which need to be addressed:
1. Whether there are adequate legal safeguards in place to allow the transfer to take place
2. Whether there are adequate organisational and technical measures in place to protect the data being shared
In this FREE downloadable guide we look at both of these considerations, starting with the first and how we can lawfully share personal data.
Why use ProvePrivacy to manage personal data and privacy risks?
We began our journey with ProvePrivacy in January 2025. At Navitas we have a complex organisation structure at a Global level and Privacy/Data Protection is paramount throughout.
We’ve found the experience with ProvePrivacy to be logical and straightforward; which can often be rare in privacy platforms. ProvePrivacy is a pleasure to use; Mark and the team are efficient, pragmatic and always happy to help.
Data, Data, Data. Mark is the man. Every time I have a question about data in either a business or IT scenario Mark is my first port of call. If you need help or advice with Data Protection or compliance with data regulation. This is where you go.
ProvePrivacy is an easy to use system and I think the work you’ve done by implementing the data retention schedule a great advantage point for the Higher Education sector.
ProvePrivacy is a very intuitive and user-friendly tool, which will be really helpful for fundraisers who might have limited data protection experience or be engaging with information governance for the first time. The fact that it was so thorough seemed like it could be really beneficial in terms of ensuring all data protection information about a given product or activity is held in one place.
Just completed the GDPR Foundation Course , which gave me a big uplift in knowledge on the new standard. The course was thorough and delivered very professionally but they key benefit for me was Mark’s ability to bring the material to life by providing and discussing examples. I would definitely recommend this training.
I’ve just completed GDPR Foundation training and thoroughly recommend it. I went in with a good working knowledge of the Data Protection Act, but not much real knowledge of how if differs to new legislation such as GDPR. By the end of the session I felt I had a really good understanding of the key aspects of GDPR, and what it will mean in practice – invaluable – and what made it even better was that I also passed the exam at the end !
Having worked with the principal director Mark, I can say that it is good to see that a courteous, professional and client dedicated experience with the end client goals always in the sights for delivery, being offered within the UK market. Having used their consulting services on a number of fronts and most recently for some training for my business on GDPR I can thoroughly recommend this team.
I attended the GDPR Foundation Course and prior to attending the course the team took the time to discuss the course content and who it was aimed at. The course itself was run at a good speed in a small manageable group which allowed the group more of the tutor’s time allowing us all and go over anything we were unsure of. The pace of the course was good with open discussion on each of the modules. The theory was brought to life with real examples where you could use it in the workplace.
I attended one of the Foundation courses and would recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about the organisational impact of GDPR. Mark is a very engaging presenter with an extensive knowledge of the regulation and is able to summarise effectively the practical implications of the regulation on businesses of all sizes.
I wholeheartedly recommend Mark’s services around GDPR consultancy and training. He understands the regulations, how they impact companies and how firms can succeed on the journey to compliance and beyond. Moreover, given his programme management and compliance background, Mark is ideally placed to accompany organisations on that route.
This article has been merged into our fuller guide, Avoiding the Common Pitfalls of Data Sharing Risks: Legal and Technical Safeguards, which now covers both the legal safeguards and the practical, technical pitfalls in one place. Please update any bookmarks or links to point there.
In our interconnected world, data sharing is crucial for business operations and personal interactions. When considering the pitfalls of data sharing, it is important to be aware of the responsibilities involved. Whether sharing customer information, collaborating with partners, or using cloud services, data is always on the move. However, this convenience comes with the responsibility to ensure data is shared securely and responsibly.
In data protection terms there are two considerations which need to be addressed:
This article covers both: the legal safeguards that need to be in place before personal data changes hands, and the practical, technical pitfalls that most commonly catch organisations out once the data is actually moving.
Article 28 of the GDPR requires data controllers to use processors who provide sufficient guarantees to protect personal data. These guarantees must be included in a binding contract with specific clauses outlined by the GDPR.
Unlike ‘Standard Data Protection Clauses,’ (see International Transfers below) the wording of these clauses is not mandated and can vary, making verification difficult. Using a checklist and seeking legal help is advisable.
These clauses ensure appropriate technical and organizational measures are in place to meet GDPR requirements and protect data subjects’ rights. The contract ensures the processor acts only on the controller’s instructions, maintains confidentiality, implements security measures, and obtains consent for sub-processing.
A Data Processing Agreement (DPA) must also be in place, specifying the nature, purpose, types of personal data, and duration of the processing. The DPA can be part of the contract, usually as a schedule.
Joint Data Processors are explicitly mentioned in the regulation, requiring a Data Sharing Agreement (DSA).
Joint Controllers are two controllers using the same data for similar purposes, such as two organizations sharing data collected at a trade show for marketing. This might confuse data subjects about who controls their data or handles complaints.
A DSA sets the terms of data sharing, ensuring transparency and cooperation between parties when a data subject makes a request. It also puts safeguards in place to protect data subjects. A DSA is required under Article 29 of the GDPR and must not be omitted.
Data protection between Data Controllers is usually covered in a contract. For example, an organization engaging a pension provider should address data protection concerns in their contract. Since both parties control the data for their own purposes, these clauses are typically limited and not mandated by regulation. However, having a sharing agreement is good practice.
Data protection regulation requires ‘Accountability,’ so documenting and recording assessments is crucial for compliance. A solution like ProvePrivacy can help with this.
To share personal data internationally, additional safeguards are needed. These vary depending on whether the destination is an “Adequate Country” or a “Third Country.”
Adequate Countries
An “adequate country” is a non-EU country that the European Commission has determined provides data protection equivalent to the EU. This is decided through an adequacy decision, assessing the country’s data protection laws, enforcement, and commitments.
Countries with an adequacy decision include Andorra, Argentina, Canada (commercial organizations), Faroe Islands, Guernsey, Israel, Isle of Man, Japan, Jersey, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, the UK, and Uruguay. This list can change and is available here.
Data transfers to these countries can occur without additional safeguards, similar to within the EU.
Third Countries
A “third country” is any country outside the European Economic Area (EEA), which includes EU member states, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. When transferring personal data to a third country, special rules and safeguards must ensure data protection.
An adequacy decision by the European Commission confirms that a third country provides comparable data protection to the EU, allowing transfers without additional safeguards. If no adequacy decision exists, appropriate safeguards like Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) or Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs) must be in place. These pre-approved clauses cannot be altered, or they become invalid.
Other safeguards, such as codes of conduct, are less common. If no safeguards exist, data transfers may still be possible with consent from data subjects or limited approval from the regulator for one-off transfers with a compelling legitimate interest.
Regular audits and assessments should ensure ongoing compliance and address potential risks associated with data sharing.
United States
The United States is not an ‘adequate country,’ but the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (DPF) provides a level of assurance at the organizational level. This framework, developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Commission, allows U.S. organizations to self-certify their adherence to privacy principles, ensuring EU data subjects’ rights are protected. The UK has adopted this framework for its own purposes.
Data Protection Professionals should remain vigilant about changes to this framework, as it is considered by some to be on thin ice. Legal scrutiny and potential invalidation, similar to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield’s fate in the Schrems II decision, could jeopardise the framework’s validity and disrupt data transfers. Concerns about U.S. government surveillance and the adequacy of privacy protections for UK data subjects remain contentious issues.
Getting the legal safeguards right is only half the job. Many organisations and individuals fall into the same avoidable traps once data is actually moving. Here’s what to watch for, and how to avoid it.
One of the most critical mistakes organisations make when sharing data is failing to encrypt it properly. Encryption ensures that even if data is intercepted, it cannot be accessed without the decryption key. Without encryption, sensitive data is vulnerable to cyberattacks, unauthorised access, and data breaches.
How to avoid it:
When sharing data with third parties, organisations often fail to clearly define who can access specific pieces of information. This opens the door for data to be misused, either accidentally or intentionally. Sometimes, too many people or systems are given access to sensitive information, creating unnecessary risks.
How to avoid it:
Data sharing is not a “set it and forget it” practice. Organisations should regularly audit how and with whom their data is being shared. This includes tracking data flow, checking who has access to what data, and identifying potential vulnerabilities. Without regular audits, it’s easy for risky behaviours or unauthorised access to go unnoticed.
How to avoid it:
Different countries and industries have varying legal frameworks surrounding data privacy and sharing. Neglecting to account for these laws can lead to costly fines, lawsuits, and reputational damage. Regulations like GDPR in the EU mandate how data should be handled, shared, and protected.
How to avoid it:
While third-party services like cloud providers or data processors can offer convenience and scalability, relying too heavily on them can expose you to risks. A third-party vendor may not implement the same level of security protocols, or worse, they may be a target for cybercriminals. Data breaches that occur within third-party systems can directly affect your organisation.
How to avoid it:
A significant portion of data breaches stems from human error, whether it’s employees falling for phishing attacks, improperly handling data, or mistakenly sharing information with unauthorised parties. The best technology won’t be effective if the people using it aren’t properly trained.
How to avoid it:
Shadow IT refers to the use of unauthorised devices, applications, or services to store or share data, often without the knowledge or approval of IT departments. It’s an increasing issue in modern workplaces, where employees may bypass official tools to streamline their work or avoid red tape. Unfortunately, shadow IT can create significant vulnerabilities, especially when sensitive data is involved.
How to avoid it:
Another common pitfall is sharing too much or too little data. Over-sharing can lead to privacy violations, regulatory breaches, and unintended exposure of sensitive information. On the other hand, under-sharing can create operational inefficiencies and may hinder collaboration.
How to avoid it:
Data sharing is essential, but it comes with the responsibility to ensure lawful and responsible handling. Legal safeguards and technical measures are both crucial, and neither is sufficient on its own.
For data processors, Article 28 of the GDPR mandates binding contracts with specific clauses to protect personal data. Joint Data Controllers require a Data Sharing Agreement (DSA) to ensure transparency and cooperation, and international transfers need safeguards that vary by destination, from adequacy decisions to Standard Contractual Clauses.
Alongside those legal foundations, the day-to-day practical habits matter just as much: encrypting data in transit and at rest, defining and reviewing access permissions, auditing data flows, vetting third-party providers, training staff, and controlling shadow IT all reduce the risk of a data breach or privacy violation.
Ultimately, protecting shared data is not just a technical or legal challenge but a cultural one. Ensuring that everyone involved, from employees to third-party vendors, understands the risks and responsibilities is key to safeguarding sensitive information in an increasingly complex data landscape.
Want this as a reference you can share internally? Download our free guide to avoiding data sharing risks, or get in touch to see how the ProvePrivacy platform can help you manage data sharing risk day to day.
The protection of personal data is a significant element of any information security ecosystem, and adhering to standards like ISO 27701 can enhance this protection. If this ecosystem is neglected, it can have a significant impact that puts your organization at risk of increasingly malicious threats which present an increasing risk to your business.
ISO 27701 is a global privacy standard, and it demonstrates the importance of improved personal data protection. Evidencing that your organisation can meet ISO 27701 certification will ensure you have in place the processes and controls to protect your personal data assets and manage the data protection risks posed to your organisation.
Understanding ISO 27701?
ISO 27701 is an extension to ISO 27001 which includes additional requirements, objectives and controls for your Privacy Information Management System (PIMS). The standard provides guidance to organisations on how to act on data protection and privacy and assist them in protecting personal data enabling them to achieve compliance with regulations such as GDPR or the UK Data Protection Act (2018).
ISO 27701 allows an organisation to establish a set of objectives and set controls to meet these objectives, thereby evidencing that actions are being taken to protect personal data. When an organisation applies the standard and extends its objectives to cover privacy management, it shows stakeholders that it is taking the protection of personal data seriously. Under revised regulation such as GDPR, data protection by design is a legal requirement. However, many organisations find this difficult to evidence, which is where implementing ISO 27701 provides the guidance and evidence required to achieve compliance.
Who should seek ISO 27701 certification?
Any organisation that handles any form of personal data should be concerned about how it is protected. This means that ISO 27701 could be relevant to all businesses. Where the risk to personal data is more acute, such as large volumes of personal data, sensitive personal data or, where a data breach would have a more serious impact (for example on an organisations reputation) then ISO 27701 would be increasingly important.
Aligning with a PIMS such as ProvePrivacy will help an organisation to apply and evidence the standard and to encourage continual improvement within their organisation. It is often the case that senior management aren’t clear about what is expected from them regarding protecting personal data, so implementing ISO 27701 would be a clear advantage to them.
Does having ISO 27701 make us GDPR Compliant?
No, you should not expect any system to make you compliant with data protection regulations, because risks and issues can occur at any time. However, ISO 27701 sets objectives and establishes controls which will provide your organisation with an auditable management standard and enable you to build an organisation which is resilient to risks. In doing so you should be able to begin evidencing data protection by design and by default alongside the technical and organisational measures that your organisation has put in place to protect personal data.
What happens if an issue arises such as a data breach?
ISO 27701 would help your organisation to put policies, procedures and processes in place which dictate the response and address crucial questions, for example who to contact. The ProvePrivacy platform will help further with this by allowing the policies and procedures to be distributed annually to all staff, evidencing that they have read and understood them and by providing staff with a Breach and Risk reporting system, which alerts the appropriate response teams within your organisation, enabling them to act quickly and report to the regulators appropriately.
ProvePrivacy can be used without the ISO 27701 module with similar benefits, however, applying it provides more of a guarantee that you’ve implemented adequate processes.
How do we encourage continual improvement?
Continual improvement sits at the heart of both the ISO 27701 standard and the ProvePrivacy platform. The ISO 27701 module within ProvePrivacy is designed not only to evidence that objectives and controls are implemented, but it also provides automated reminders when a control is due to expire, so that appropriate teams can respond in a timely manner. This allows risks to be assessed, improvements to be applied and issues to be avoided.
How does ISO 27701 align with ISO 27001?
ISO 27701 has been developed to be integrated within an ISO 27001 ISMS. In practice if an organisation wishes to be ISO 27701 certified it must also achieve ISO 27001 certification. The design of ProvePrivacy, allows an organisation to set and establish the objectives and controls for ISO 27701 in isolation if required. ProvePrivacy supports ISO 27001 objectives and controls in addition to ISO 27701 and encourages organisations to undertake both. Obtaining certification for both reduces duplication and saves time and enables auditors to perform deeper audits, implementing ProvePrivacy simplifies audits as most of the evidence is maintained within the platform.
How can we evidence we are managing our objectives?
ISO 27001 and ISO 27701 provide the guidance to setting your objectives and establishing your controls and it is up to each organisation to determine which objectives and controls it wishes to implement. ProvePrivacy assists by letting you select your objectives and controls, stating why you have elected to exclude any, you can also use ProvePrivacy to plan the implementation of controls, store supporting evidence that your controls are in place and working, and provide reminders when controls need to be reviewed.
Whilst ProvePrivacy cannot remove the work required to become ISO 27001 or ISO 27701 certified, it can certainly help an organisation achieve certification and assist in preparation for audits. Book a demo to see the platform in action.
During the DPN webinar on 21st February panellists Mark Roebuck, Robert Bond, Louise Garrett-Cox and Simon Blanchard took on a host of topics and questions ranging from “what are data assets and IARs,” to “how do I see the value of a ROPA and gain stakeholder buy-in”.
Here we summarise 5 key takeaways from the event.
1. What is an Information Asset Register (IAR) and who does it benefit?
An IAR is a record of the information that your organisation is storing and using, covering a diverse range of items (electronic and physical) and systems such as CRM, email accounts, HR and backups. The IAR classifies each asset in terms of sensitivity, criticality, risk profile and vulnerabilities, as well as areas such as who has access to the data and data retention periods, all of which illustrate data compliance.
An IAR benefits multiple roles across an organisation:
For a fuller breakdown of what good information asset management looks like in practice, see our guide, Information Asset Management: Why It’s Critical for Data Protection Compliance.
2. What are data assets?
‘Data assets’ refer to the various types of data an organisation collects, manages and uses as part of its operations, this can encompass a wide range of information such as customer data, financial records, operational data, research data and more. It also covers both structured and unstructured data both of which need to be identified in the context of a data asset register.
Structured data tends to be highly organised, following a specific format, typically stored in databases or spreadsheets such as a CRM or financial records. Unstructured data doesn’t have a predefined format making it more challenging to organise than structured data, an example of this could be emails and documents.
3. What is a Record of Processing Activities (ROPA) and what is it’s value?
A ROPA may be a compliance requirement for some but it is a valuable tool to any organisation. It provides a central place that collates all processing activities in turn allowing organisations assess these for data protection risks and identify gaps for continuous improvements including:
These continuous improvements then help build an overall organisation risk profile so that activities can be prioritised, progress monitored and compliance retained.
4. How important is gaining & retaining stakeholder buy-in?
Ensuring that stakeholders are actively involved in managing and updating a ROPA is key to its success and the overall management and mitigation of an organisation’s risk profile. Ways to gain and retain stakeholder buy in include:
If relationships are managed and maintained the overall importance and awareness of a ROPA is understood.
5. What measures and controls can be put in place to mitigate risks?
Measures and controls will vary depending on various factors including the type of risk, volume of data and sensitivity, as well as the organisation’s risk appetite.
A great place to start is to look at the information security, and security and data governance policies, these will cover areas such as MFA, restricted access, file sharing, staff training, procedures, and information privacy and retention. Once ready stakeholder management can then be sought to gain early buy-in to these policies and the importance of contents.
These are just some of the topics covered during the discussion, watch the full webinar recording.
Want to understand more about IAR? Download our quick guide to IAR or get in touch to discuss this and other data compliance requirements.
Unsure how to manage information assets and personal data within your organisation? In this webinar panellists covered a range of topics including:
Want the panel’s key points in writing? Read our 5 key takeaways on IAR, RoPA and stakeholder buy-in, or for a fuller guide to building and maintaining an information asset register, see Information Asset Management: Why It’s Critical for Data Protection Compliance.
Why use ProvePrivacy to manage personal data and privacy risks?
As a business the task of safeguarding valuable assets has, and continues to become more challenging with technology and information continually evolving. Establishing and maintaining an Information Asset Register (IAR) is just one element of this safeguarding and provides a comprehensive inventory of an organisation’s data and information resources. This in turn enables better management, protection, and utilisation of these assets.
In this article, we will explore how an Information Asset Register can contribute to enhanced security, regulatory compliance, and overall operational efficiency.
1. Identification and Classification
An IAR starts by identifying and classifying the diverse variety of information assets within an organisation. This process involves categorising data based on its sensitivity, criticality, and relevance to business operations. By creating a detailed inventory, organisations gain a clearer understanding of the data they possess, allowing for targeted protective measures.
Understanding the risks associated with each information asset is vital for effective risk management. An IAR facilitates the assessment of potential threats and vulnerabilities, helping organisations prioritise resources and efforts to mitigate these risks. By categorising assets according to their importance, organisations can allocate security measures proportionately, ensuring that their most critical information receives the highest level of protection.
3. Regulatory Compliance
In an era of increasing data protection regulations, compliance is paramount. An IAR supports organisations in maintaining compliance with data protection laws and industry regulations. By documenting how information is collected, processed, and stored, organisations can demonstrate accountability and transparency to regulatory authorities. This proactive approach not only reduces the risk of legal consequences but also builds trust with customers and partners.
4. Access Control and Authorisation
Efficient management of information assets involves controlling who has access to what data. An IAR provides a foundation for implementing robust access control measures. By clearly documenting the individuals or roles authorised to access specific information assets, organisations can prevent unauthorised access, reducing the risk of data breaches and insider threats.
5. Data Lifecycle Management
Information assets have a lifecycle, from creation to archival or disposal. An IAR aids in managing this lifecycle effectively. By tracking when data is created, accessed, modified, and deleted, organisations can optimise storage resources, reduce clutter, and ensure compliance with data retention policies. This not only enhances efficiency but also streamlines compliance efforts.
6. Incident Response and Recovery
Despite the best preventive measures, security incidents can still occur. An IAR plays a crucial role in incident response and recovery. By having a clear record of information assets, organisations can quickly identify compromised data and take swift action to contain and recover from security breaches. This minimises the impact of incidents and aids in the restoration of normal business operations.
7. Resource Optimisation
An IAR is a valuable tool for optimising resources. By understanding the value and importance of each information asset, organisations can allocate resources more effectively. This includes investments in security measures, staff training, and technology solutions.
An IAR is a cornerstone of modern information management and security practices. By providing a centralised inventory of information assets, organisations can enhance their security measures, achieve regulatory compliance, and optimise operational efficiency. With the digital landscape continuing to evolve, those businesses that prioritise the development and maintenance of a robust IAR will be best placed to navigate the challenges of an increasingly data-centric world.ProvePrivacy allows your organisation to demonstrate that it has the technical and organisational measures and reporting to support processes, with your ROPA directly connected to a live information asset register. Book a demo.
If you would like to ask more questions or to arrange training, complete the form below and we will respond shortly.
Prefer to schedule a 15 minute call? Schedule call today >>