Portfolio Case Study // Human Factors + GRC
AQT OPERATING COMPANY // MSA

Meridian Shield Assurance Security Awareness & Human Factors Governance Program

An enterprise security-awareness and control-design case study for Meridian Shield Assurance (MSA), a fictional operating subsidiary of Aegis Quantum Trust, focused on human factors, policy governance, continuous monitoring, insider-risk reduction, and executive communication.

GRCHuman FactorsSecurity AwarenessControl DesignCIS Controls v8.1NIST

Case overview

The project placed me in the role of CISO for Meridian Shield Assurance (MSA), a fictional Aegis Quantum Trust subsidiary with a low-maturity security environment where technical weaknesses, human behavior, and organizational practices were reinforcing one another. The objective was to design a security-awareness program that could improve posture without treating every failure as an employee problem.

10
security policies developed as the control foundation
3 years
between vulnerability assessments in the original state
4
organizational lenses: data flow, work setting, work planning, employee readiness

Security posture

MSA’s posture, as an operating subsidiary within Aegis Quantum Trust, was low and reactive. The environment lacked visibility, consistent vulnerability review, formal change control, and sufficient data-protection practices.

Technical exposure

  • No centralized collection or analysis of security event logs
  • No IDS/IPS capability
  • Weak encryption and integrity controls
  • No formal configuration change-management process
  • Inadequate removable-media controls

Human + organizational exposure

  • Successful phishing and social-engineering incidents
  • No annual awareness program
  • High turnover and low morale
  • Weak separation of duties and insider-risk controls
  • Readiness, workload, fatigue, and role-clarity concerns

Control architecture

The design combined technical and organizational controls rather than treating awareness as a once-a-year training event.

Control DomainWhat Was DesignedEvidence
Security AwarenessOnboarding + annual training, phishing simulations, role-specific learningTraining records, simulation results, assessments
Change ManagementApproval, testing, rollback planning, post-implementation validationChange records, approvals, test results
MonitoringCentralized logging, IDS/IPS, alert tuning, documented escalationSIEM configuration, logs, tuning records, tickets
Data ProtectionEncryption, integrity validation, media controls, classified data flowsEncryption reports, flow diagrams, exceptions
Identity + Insider RiskLeast privilege, access reviews, separation of duties, mandatory leaveAccess matrices, reviews, revocation records
Vulnerability ManagementQuarterly assessment, monthly review, remediation and rescanningScan reports, remediation tickets, retest evidence

Evidence-driven governance

A control is not finished when the policy is written. The organization has to be able to show that the control operated, was reviewed, and was improved when it failed.

CONTROL DESIGN
↓
EXECUTION
↓
EVIDENCE
↓
REVIEW
↓
IMPROVEMENT

Monitoring cadence

WEEKLY
Security log review and escalation of major findings.
MONTHLY
Alert tuning, vulnerability review, remediation prioritization.
QUARTERLY
Internal vulnerability assessments and account reviews where required.
ANNUAL + CHANGE
Access matrices, policy reviews, and reassessment after major environmental change.

Human factors

One of the strongest lessons from the project was that human error is not solved by telling people to “be more careful.” The control environment has to account for how work is actually performed.

Inattention
Use defined procedures, readiness checks, and supervisory review.
Fatigue
Tune alerts, distribute workload, maintain backup staffing.
Low morale
Use nonpunitive good-faith reporting and clearer expectations.
Intentional misuse
Separate duties, monitor access, preserve evidence, investigate.

Executive communication

Leadership view

  • Operational risk and business continuity
  • Financial exposure and customer trust
  • Policy implementation and unresolved risk
  • Decisions requiring executive approval
  • Concise Jira / SharePoint reporting

Workforce view

  • Short, practical micro-learning
  • Nonpunitive phishing remediation
  • Inquiry mailbox for questions
  • Lunch and Learn sessions
  • Town halls and bidirectional feedback

Project artifacts

The portfolio includes both detailed governance deliverables and the executive communication layer.

Final Security Awareness Program Proposal

Integrated security posture, human-factor analysis, organizational risk, control recommendations, monitoring, and communication.

Open Word artifact

10-Policy Control Package

Ten policies mapped to identified gaps and supported by evidence requirements.

Open artifact

Continuous Monitoring Plan

Open artifact

Communication Plan

Open artifact

Executive Presentation

Open PPTX

Capabilities demonstrated

GRC

Gap analysis, policy design, control evidence, governance, risk-based review frequency.

Human-factor security

Awareness, social engineering, fatigue, workload, readiness, morale, reporting culture.

Executive communication

Translating technical weaknesses into business, financial, operational, and trust impacts.

Portfolio context

This is an academic case study developed for IT-552: Human Factors in Security. MSA is presented here as a fictional operating subsidiary of Aegis Quantum Trust. The work is presented as a portfolio example of security-awareness program design, GRC analysis, control development, continuous monitoring, human-factor risk evaluation, and executive communication.