Topic starter
24/10/2026 8:47 pm
TL;DR: 37% of cybersecurity professionals say they cannot handle the current workload, a survey finding Nozomi Networks uses to frame OT security burnout as a governance strain, not just a staffing problem. OT programmes need clearer prioritisation and less manual labour or the workload keeps eroding visibility and response cadence.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Nozomi Networks: “An ICS Cybersecurity Storm is Brewing: How to Prevent Staff Burnout”.
By the numbers:
- 37% of cybersecurity professionals felt they were unable to handle the current workload, according to Cyber Security in 2019 research cited by Nozomi Networks.
- Two-thirds considered quitting their jobs due to the pressure of cyber threats, according to Cyber Security in 2019 research cited by Nozomi Networks.
- Security technology evaluation and procurement cycles can take 12 to 24 months in OT environments, according to Nozomi Networks.
Key questions
Q: Why does IT/OT convergence make cybersecurity workload harder to sustain?
A: IT/OT convergence widens the number of systems, users, and access paths that must be governed, but responsibility is often split across teams with different priorities.
Q: What are the signs that OT security governance is becoming overloaded?
A: Common signs include recurring manual exceptions, delayed offboarding, patch backlogs that never shrink, and security work that is always dominated by the latest incident or alert.
Q: What breaks when OT security teams are forced to operate in permanent reactive mode?
A: Reactive OT security breaks when every decision becomes an exception, because staff stop having the time and context needed to prioritise real exposure.
Practitioner guidance
- Define OT access ownership by role and system Assign explicit accountability for granting, reviewing, and removing access across OT engineers, SOC staff, contractors, and service accounts.
- Replace ad hoc patching with risk-ranked remediation Use asset criticality, exposure context, and operational dependency to decide what gets fixed first.
- Build workload relief into detection and triage Automate routine visibility and alert correlation so staff can spend time on higher-value decisions instead of repetitive review.
Bottom line: OT burnout is not just a staffing issue, because overloaded teams cannot sustain the governance, monitoring, and response cadence that industrial environments demand.
Glossary terms: Operational Technology, SOC Burnout, IT/OT Convergence, Risk Prioritisation
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 6 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
25/10/2026 11:11 am
Burnout is a governance failure mode, not just a workforce problem. When OT teams spend most of their time reacting, the organisation has effectively turned security into a labour-intensive exception process. That model does not scale against daily threat changes, especially where availability and safety constraints already slow remediation. The practitioner lesson is that resilience depends on control design that reduces recurring human drag, not on asking exhausted teams to move faster.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should organisations prioritise visibility improvements before expanding more OT security tools?
A: Yes, if current teams cannot see critical assets clearly enough to make risk-based decisions. More tools do not help if the environment still lacks asset context, ownership, and prioritised remediation paths. In OT, visibility is the prerequisite that makes every later control more effective and less costly to operate.
👉 Read our full editorial: OT cyber burnout is a governance problem, not just a staffing issue
This post was modified 6 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group