TOS023
Automate stable-process monitoring and configure risk-threshold triggers to escalate human auditor involvement only when control deterioration is detected.
CyberTRIZ analysis · Audit contradiction TOS023 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Continuous Assurance vs Sustainable Resource Use
Business ContextContinuous assurance can provide earlier visibility into control deterioration and changing exposure. Maintaining constant human review, investigation, model maintenance, and data validation across numerous processes can consume more resources than the audit function can sustain.
Audit TRIZ ResolutionAutomate routine assurance and vary human involvement according to risk signals. Stable conditions remain under automated observation, while significant changes, threshold breaches, model deterioration, or persistent exceptions trigger targeted auditor intervention.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 25 – Self-Service allows automated systems to perform routine assurance functions.
Principle 23 – Feedback triggers human intervention when risk indicators change.
Principle 3 – Local Quality varies assurance intensity according to current exposure.
Expected Outcome
Broader continuous assurance
Sustainable resource requirements
Faster response to deterioration
Greater auditor focus
Decision Indicators
Continuous assurance requires constant manual review.
Monitoring activities consume increasing portions of audit capacity.
Stable processes receive the same attention as deteriorating areas.
Audit reduces continuous coverage because staffing requirements are excessive.
Automated assurance operates without risk-based escalation.