Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
30/07/2026 10:49 pm
TL;DR: Cybersecurity initiatives often stall because cross-team pushback, weak executive sponsorship, and misaligned incentives block adoption more often than technology gaps, according to Illumio’s analysis. The practical lesson is that security programmes succeed when they align on outcomes, not just controls, and when leaders keep the organisation engaged through delivery.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Illumio: 3 Practical Ways to Win Buy-In for Your Cybersecurity Projects
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams get buy-in for a new cybersecurity control?
A: Start by identifying the teams that will carry the operational burden, then tie the control to a business outcome they already care about, such as recovery time or fewer disruptions.
Q: Why do cybersecurity programmes stall even when the risk case is strong?
A: They stall when the proposal is technically correct but organisationally misaligned.
Q: What do security teams get wrong about executive sponsorship?
A: They treat sponsorship as a funding checkpoint instead of an operating signal.
Practitioner guidance
- Build a stakeholder map for every control change List the teams that will absorb work, operational risk, or workflow disruption before the project is presented for approval.
- Secure executive sponsorship tied to a business outcome Ask leaders to endorse the outcome you are trying to deliver, such as lower recovery time, fewer outages, or faster containment, rather than only the implementation plan.
- Translate technical controls into failure scenarios Use a short scenario that shows what happens if the control is missing, who is affected, and how the business absorbs the impact.
What's in the full article
Illumio's full blog covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- A practical explanation of how to build a business case that survives cross-team resistance and budget friction.
- Examples of the stakeholder concerns that often block deployment, including overlapping tools and perceived workflow disruption.
- Concrete storytelling approaches for making cybersecurity risk understandable to non-specialist audiences.
- Guidance on using leadership sponsorship to keep implementation moving after initial approval.
👉 Read Illumio's blog on three practical ways to win buy-in for cybersecurity projects →
Cybersecurity project buy-in: what teams actually need to align on?
Explore further
30/07/2026 10:55 pm
Cross-team alignment is now a core security control, not a soft skill. Security programmes fail when governance assumes technical correctness is enough to drive adoption. In reality, networking, operations, infrastructure, and security each carry different risk tolerances and delivery pressures. Identity programmes are especially exposed because access, privilege, and lifecycle controls cut across ownership boundaries. Practitioners should treat alignment as part of control design, not as a post-approval communications task.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can security teams make technical risk understandable to non-specialists?
A: Use a concrete scenario that shows the operational consequence of not acting. Describe what fails, who absorbs the disruption, and why the timing matters. That approach makes the control easier to discuss with business, operations, and infrastructure stakeholders because it turns abstract risk into a shared operational story.
👉 Read our full editorial: Three ways cybersecurity projects win buy-in in siloed organisations
