Superior Essay Writers | Regulatory Requirements

Regulatory Requirements

Choose one of the following regulatory frameworks and discuss in detail its impacts on a particular enterprise or organization, ideally based on your own personal or professional experience.

Focus your discussion on how compliance with the regulation drove (or could drive) the design of network modification or the deployment of a security control. Alternately, you can discuss a case of regulatory noncompliance and its consequences. Consider the following:

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)
Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA).
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS).
Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX).
Another of your choosing.

Sample Solution

I chose the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) and its impacts on my organization. SOX was enacted in response to a series of corporate scandals including Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco that cost investors billions of dollars. The act set new standards for public company financial reporting as well as internal control systems and governance structures.

At my organization, we have had to invest significant time and resources into complying with all aspects of SOX. Our external auditors are required to assess the effectiveness of our internal controls related to financial reporting, which requires us to provide them with detailed documentation about our processes and procedures. We also must maintain a system of checks and balances over any changes made to the accounting system or financial reports.

This article explores further the concept of bounded rationality and rational behaviour. Theories of bounded rationality argue that cognition can be limited by incomplete information regarding alternative choices. Furthermore, rationality can be bounded by actor’s forgoing the cost of searching for optimal outcomes by settling on a sub-optimal outcome; thus becoming a theory of optimal approximation. The authors consider the decision making dynamics of chess, offering an alternative approach to rationality. Studies have shown that strong chess players rarely consider all possible strategies before making a move, rather they only generate and examine a relatively small number of possible moves, choosing the first move they regard as satisfactory. The game of chess is able to merge the three limits of perfect rationality together: that is the uncertainty over the consequences of alternatives, incomplete information on alternatives and computation disrupted by complexity. The authors thus argue that, regardless of the position a player is in, they will always be limited by their own rationality. The paper then, interestingly, attempts to use theories of bounded rationality to better understand design. The theory of design, the authors argue, can be assimilated to a satisficing theory of rational choice. Whenever complete designs are reached, they are not evaluated by comparison with alternatives, but rather are exclusively compared to the standards which are defined by the designer’s aspirational levels. Satisficing is therefore an integral part of the search process. This model can also be applied to management science, where possible plans are gradually built up, with many alternatives being immediately dismissed throughout. To mitigate this limit to rationality, management science utilises simulation to explore a limited set of alternatives. However, even this, lacks the ability to discover new alternatives. This article, when positioned amongst broader literature, offers a refreshingly new contribution to the field. Design has rarely been analysed with a rational decision-making model, however this paper demonstrates how bounded-rationality findings relating to chess can be effectively ove>

GET ANSWER