Topic starter
08/02/2026 10:12 pm
TL;DR: Cybersecurity KPIs work best when they map to specific business objectives, such as securing cloud workloads, and track measurable identity risks like SSO and MFA coverage, PAM protection for admin keys, shadow admins, and excessive permissions, according to CyberArk. The real test is whether reporting reduces decision noise and exposes NHI governance gaps that boards can act on.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by CyberArk: “5 Strategies for Setting the Right Cybersecurity KPIs”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when cloud KPI reporting is not tied to identity risk?
A: The reporting becomes descriptive instead of decision-useful.
Q: Why do cloud workload KPIs need to focus on privileged access and permissions?
A: Because cloud compromise usually starts with access, not with the final impact.
Q: How do security teams know whether KPI reporting is actually working?
A: Look for metrics that change the board conversation and alter prioritisation.
Practitioner guidance
- Define metrics from the security objective backward Start with a concrete objective such as securing cloud workloads, then map key results and KPIs to the access paths that can break it.
- Track privileged access coverage explicitly Measure the number of cloud admins secured by SSO and MFA, and separately the number of cloud admins and admin API access keys under PAM controls.
- Measure shadow admin removal and excess permissions Use KPIs that show how many shadow admins remain and how much excessive permission exposure persists.
Bottom line: Cloud KPI programmes are weakest when they collect broad signals that do not map to a specific identity or workload objective.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
08/10/2026 5:19 pm
Identity-focused KPIs are the only cloud reporting metrics that reliably translate into governance action. The article’s cloud workload example shows why board reporting works best when it tracks who can access what, under which controls, and with what residual exposure. That is a governance model, not a tooling inventory. For NHI and human IAM programmes alike, the board needs metrics that map to privilege, coverage, and removable risk.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between tactical security metrics and board KPIs?
A: Tactical metrics help teams run the programme day to day, while board KPIs show whether the programme is changing risk. A good board KPI is fewer, more contextual, and tied to business outcomes. Tactical metrics can be many; board KPIs should be the ones that explain progress clearly.
👉 Read our full editorial: Cybersecurity KPIs for cloud workloads need tighter identity focus