Description

A focused course, tailored for you

The SOX & Security Controls Convergence Playbook

Name: The SOX & Security Controls Convergence Playbook
Price: 199 USD
Availability: InStock

For SOX leads who also own security control attestation and need one walkthrough that satisfies both auditors without two parallel binders.

Your control owners are sitting through two walkthroughs for the same control. SOX needs the access review evidence. Security needs the access review evidence. Same owner, same screenshot, same Jira query, two audit teams, three-week gap, double the prep time.

$199 one-time

Tailored to your situation. Access within 24 hours. 30-day money-back.

Includes a hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access, generated for your specific situation.

Why this course

The combined SOX and security scope is real work. ITGCs for SOX cover access provisioning, change management, SDLC, computer operations, and logical access. The security attestation scope (whether SOC 2, ISO 27002, or an internal security framework) overlaps heavily on those exact domains and adds incident response, vulnerability management, vendor risk, and continuous monitoring. The owners are the same engineers and IT operations leads. The systems are the same Okta, GitHub, Jira, AWS, and ServiceNow instances. But the audit programmes are run as if they are unrelated. Owners get walkthrough fatigue. Evidence requests overlap by 60 to 80 percent. Exceptions get logged in two different trackers with different identifiers and no cross-reference. By the time both audits close, the control population has the same exception three times in three places and nobody can answer which version is authoritative. The convergence work is what saves the next cycle.

What you walk away with

Build a single converged control matrix that satisfies SOX ITGC and the security attestation scope with one evidence pull per control.
Reduce control owner walkthrough time by half through the joint interview script and shared sample selection.
Maintain a single exception log that both audit teams reference with cross-IDs to each programme.
Identify the genuinely divergent controls so you stop trying to force-align them and document the divergence explicitly.
Run the combined cycle with one PMO calendar, one evidence platform tag, and one owner accountability list.

The 12 modules

Module 1. The convergence map

Walks the SOX ITGC control population alongside the security attestation control population and produces the overlap matrix. Names which controls are identical (same owner, same evidence, same test), which are related (same owner, related evidence, different test), and which are genuinely divergent. The output is one A3 page the SOX lead and the security lead both sign as the master taxonomy for the cycle.

Module 2. Unified control taxonomy

Resolves the naming collision between SOX ITGC numbering and the security framework numbering. Builds the master control ID scheme that carries both references, so a single control reads as ITGC-AC-01 / SEC-AM-01 in every artefact. Walks the conversion from the previous parallel taxonomies, including the historic exception cross-references that have to migrate.

Module 3. Shared evidence index

The single evidence catalogue that both audit teams reference. Each evidence artefact (an Okta export, a Jira query, a GitHub PR log, a ServiceNow change ticket) is named once, owned by one person, refreshed on one cadence, and tagged with both audit programme IDs. The module includes the index template, the refresh calendar, and the owner accountability matrix.

Module 4. Joint walkthrough script

The control owner walkthrough script that satisfies both auditors in one session. Covers the dual-purpose questions, the evidence demonstration sequence, the exception probing both teams need, and the close-out that produces signed walkthrough memos for both programmes. Built from the perspective of an owner who has 90 minutes to give and is being asked to give it twice.

Module 5. Shared sample selection

How to pull one sample population that satisfies both auditors. Covers the statistical sufficiency rules each side uses, the population definition reconciliation, the random-versus-judgemental seed agreement, and the documentation of sample selection methodology that both audit teams accept. Includes the workbook for sample size calculation across both programmes.

Module 6. Access provisioning under both lenses

The single deepest overlap zone. SOX wants joiners, movers, leavers tied to role-based access and segregation of duties. Security wants the same plus privileged access management and break-glass procedures. The module builds the converged access provisioning control, the evidence pack (Okta + HRIS + ticketing), and the joint test procedure that satisfies both teams in one walkthrough.

Module 7. Change management and SDLC convergence

Covers production change control, code promotion, peer review, and emergency change handling. SOX requires segregation of duties between developer and approver. Security requires the same plus secure code review evidence and dependency scanning. Builds the joint change matrix from Jira and GitHub, the unified change advisory board reporting, and the evidence pack both teams test against.

Module 8. Exception handling that satisfies both standards

Most exception logs die because each team logs in their own tracker. This module builds the single exception register that both teams reference, with cross-IDs, severity scoring that both standards accept, remediation timeline tracking, and the management review cadence that closes exceptions before they become recurring findings. Includes the template and the workflow.

Module 9. Vendor risk and SOC 1 / SOC 2 reliance

Where SOX leans on vendor SOC 1 reports and security leans on vendor SOC 2 reports. The module covers the vendor inventory reconciliation, the CUEC review process that pulls dual references, the gap analysis when a vendor only provides one report, and the carve-out language that satisfies both audit programmes. Includes the vendor evidence tracker.

Module 10. Where SOX and security genuinely diverge

The honest module. Not every control converges. Incident response specifics, vulnerability management cadence, threat intelligence handling, and several security-only domains do not have a SOX counterpart. The module documents the divergence explicitly, builds the carve-out documentation, and stops the wasted effort of forcing alignment where none exists.

Module 11. The combined audit calendar and PMO rhythm

Runs both programmes on one PMO calendar with shared milestones, shared owner availability tracking, shared evidence refresh deadlines, and the single status report both audit committees consume. Covers stakeholder communication patterns, escalation paths when an owner falls behind on shared evidence, and the close-out memo template.

Module 12. Cycle close and continuous monitoring handoff

How to land the cycle so the next one starts ahead. Covers the converged control matrix update, the exception log carry-forward, the evidence index version control, and the handoff to continuous monitoring including the KPIs that early-warn on a control degrading before the next walkthrough. Includes the cycle retrospective template and the management letter response framework.

How this addresses your situation

Specific modules that map to what you said you are dealing with.

Module 1-3: Build the converged map, taxonomy, and evidence index.

Module 4-5: Run the joint walkthrough and shared sample selection.

Module 6-9: Work the deep-overlap control domains (access, change, exceptions, vendors).

Module 10-12: Document divergence, run the combined cycle, hand off to continuous monitoring.

What you get with this course

12 written modules in the Art of Service learning environment.
Convergence map workbook with the overlap matrix template.
Joint walkthrough script with control-owner-ready questions.
Unified exception register template with cross-ID schema.
Vendor SOC report reliance tracker.
Hand-built implementation playbook tailored to your specific control population and audit calendar.
30-day money-back guarantee.

What you will have in hand by Day 1, Week 1, Month 1

Within 24 hours: learning environment provisioned, course modules available, hand-built implementation playbook delivered.

Week 1-2: Modules 1-3, build the converged map and taxonomy.

Week 3-4: Modules 4-5, walkthrough and sample work.

Week 5-8: Modules 6-9, work the deep-overlap domains.

Week 9-10: Modules 10-12, divergence, cycle, handoff.

Before and after

Before

Two walkthroughs per owner, two exception logs, two evidence pulls per control, two PMO calendars, and the audit committee gets two separate status updates that look almost the same.

After

One walkthrough per owner, one exception log with dual cross-references, one evidence pull, one PMO calendar, and one converged status update that both audit teams sign.

What happens if you do not address this

The owners burn out. The exception log diverges across two trackers and nobody can answer which is current. The audit committee asks why the same control fails in one report and passes in the other. The next cycle starts behind because the close-out from this cycle never got consolidated.

Who it is for

SOX lead, IT audit manager, or controls owner who inherited a parallel security attestation scope. Already runs the SOX programme cleanly. Was handed the security control attestation either after a vendor risk escalation, a customer audit clause, or an internal restructure that combined controls under one team. Now sits in front of two control matrices that look 70 percent the same and is trying to figure out whether to merge them, run them parallel, or fight to give one back.

Who this is NOT for. Pure security engineers who do not own SOX. Pure SOX leads with no security attestation responsibility. External auditors. Anyone whose control population is fewer than 50 controls.

How it arrives

Text-based course in the Art of Service learning environment, plus downloadable templates and worked examples for every module, plus the hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access.

Time investment. Roughly 30 to 40 hours across 10 weeks, plus the implementation effort against your own control population.

Why $199 is the right number

Big Four advisory engagements solve this at 75K to 200K and bring a methodology you then have to maintain alone afterward. Internal-only attempts stall because no single owner has cycles to design the converged taxonomy from scratch. This course delivers the converged design, the templates, and a tailored implementation playbook for your population at 199 USD.

FAQ

Does this assume a specific security framework?

No. The convergence patterns apply to SOC 2, ISO 27002, NIST CSF, or an internal security control framework. The implementation playbook is tailored to whichever framework your security attestation scope uses.

What if our SOX and security audit teams are the same external firm?

Better. The convergence work lands faster because evidence pre-shared with one team is already accepted by the other. The course covers the firm-level convergence conversation.

How specific is the implementation playbook?

It names your specific control population scope, your specific audit calendar, the specific systems referenced in your evidence pulls, and the convergence map for your two frameworks.

30-day money-back guarantee. If after a week of working through the materials this is not what you needed, reply to the receipt email and a full refund is processed. No questions, no forms.

Within 24 hours your account in the learning environment is provisioned and the tailored implementation playbook is delivered alongside it.