Originally Posted by
BigFrank
There is a Group-wide Cyber Security Governance Board that reports to the Chief of Staff.
Hmmm. The Chief of Staff is responsible for global communications, government relations and executive administration and [oh yes, got to put that somewhere] business services. And the Chief of Staff's CV? Communication ... communication ... communication ... started her career as a journalist.
So the Cyber Security Governance Board reports to the main board via a professional spin doctor. Is this a person who's likely to tell inconvenient truth to power?
¿ Does the fact that she doesn't have a Spanish (or Irish, or for that matter French) -sounding name mean that she is in the clear ?
No, it doesn't; in my book the lady is in the clear because she's a communications professional who's been given (and shouldn't have been given) a role that requires her, if she does it properly, to go directly against her professional instincts. Maybe she can do that; if so, good for her; but
prima facie I wouldn't expect it. The person who's not in the clear (IMHO) is the Group CEO, who apparently thinks that cyber security is so unimportant that it can be delegated via a 'chief of staff' whose primary focus is communications.
(Just in case anyone might be confused, 'communications' in the above means 'public relations', aka 'spin', not telecoms!)