Robotic Process Automation Risks: Mitigation and Third-Party Risk Management
Atlas Systems Named a Representative Vendor in 2025 Gartner® Market Guide for TPRM Technology Solutions → Read More
Atlas Systems Named a Representative Vendor in 2025 Gartner® Market Guide for TPRM Technology Solutions → Read More
Optimize and secure provider data
Streamline provider-payer interactions
Verify real-time provider data
Verify provider data, ensure compliance
Create accurate, printable directories
Reduce patient wait times efficiently.
08 Apr, 2025, 18 min read
It is easy for risks to pile up when timelines stretch, accountability blurs, or teams assume someone else is handling the issue. The longer a confirmed vulnerability lingers, the more likely it is to interfere with audits, delay partner reviews, or open doors to avoidable security noise.
If your work involves managing vendor controls, maintaining regulatory posture, or owning parts of the IT risk register, you have likely seen this play out. Gaps that were clearly documented during assessment phases do not always get the same attention when it is time to fix them, and that gap between identification and resolution is exactly where risk remediation fits in.
At its core, remediation involves assigning someone to the problem, outlining what needs to be corrected, and ensuring the fix actually resolves the issue. That might mean patching a vulnerable asset, revising access rules, or updating a policy that failed during testing. None of it is theoretical, it is follow-up work that has to happen if you want your risk register to reflect reality.
Risk remediation is the process of resolving confirmed risks by taking direct action to eliminate or reduce their impact on systems, data, or operations.
Once a risk is identified through an audit, assessment, or alert, the next step is not analysis. It is action. Remediation focuses on:
This process extends beyond cybersecurity. Risk remediation also applies to:
Depending on the type and severity of the issue, remediation might involve:
While manual work is still common, many organizations now use tools to automate parts of the process, especially for:
Ultimately, the goal is not to log a response. It is to fix the underlying issue in a way that withstands both operational stress and regulatory scrutiny.
Risk remediation plays a different role in each industry, but the objective remains the same: close security, compliance, or operational gaps before they cause measurable harm. Below is a sector-by-sector breakdown showing how remediation supports essential outcomes.
Remediation does not look the same in every environment. But regardless of sector, the principle holds: address confirmed risk with meaningful action: quickly, traceably, and in line with what the business or regulator expects.
Risk Remediation, risk mitigation, and risk treatment: these three terms often get used interchangeably, but they represent distinct approaches in a risk management strategy. Understanding the differences helps teams choose the right response based on the nature and priority of each risk.
Side-by-Side Comparison:
Aspect |
Risk Remediation |
Risk Mitigation |
Risk Treatment |
Goal |
Eliminate or fix a specific risk |
Lessen the likelihood or impact |
Choose the appropriate risk response (including mitigate, accept, transfer, avoid) |
Timing |
After a risk is confirmed and analyzed |
Proactive or preventive |
Strategic decision applied to any identified risk |
Action Type |
Fix, patch, update, remove, or disable |
Add controls, monitor, and restrict exposure |
Decide whether to reduce, outsource, accept, or avoid |
Example |
Apply a security patch to close a vulnerability |
Limit access to sensitive data using MFA |
Transfer risk through cyber insurance or accept minor findings during a low-impact audit |
Each of these plays a role in an effective risk management framework, but only remediation results in a closed issue.
Not every risk demands immediate remediation, but some clearly do. These are the types of risks where awareness alone is not enough; leaving them open puts data, systems, or compliance posture at immediate risk.
Below are common categories where remediation should be prioritized:
Risks that are known, confirmed, and tied to critical business functions or compliance obligations should never remain unresolved. The longer they sit, the harder they are to justify during an audit or explain after an incident.
A risk remediation effort should be more than a checklist task. To be effective, it needs structure, ownership, and verification. Below is a step-by-step process that organizations can use to manage remediation efforts consistently.
A solid remediation plan turns intent into execution. It lays out exactly how your organization will resolve identified risks, clearly, accountably, and in line with both internal and external requirements.
Use the checklist below as a foundation for building your own remediation plan.
When this plan is applied consistently, teams can track progress with less confusion and higher accountability, especially in fast-moving environments with overlapping risk types.
The tools you rely on to close risk gaps should not just generate alerts—they should help your team act on them without adding layers of complexity. Depending on how your environment is set up, a few of these platforms may already be in place. Others might fill gaps you have likely seen before: delays in patching, lost audit evidence, or misaligned team responsibilities.
The best tools do not just report problems. They help your team fix what matters, show their work, and stay ahead of recurring gaps.
Cybersecurity demands rapid, coordinated responses when risks are identified. Unlike operational risks that may follow longer remediation cycles, cyber risks often need near-immediate resolution to contain impact and prevent escalation.
Here are common cybersecurity scenarios where remediation takes priority and how teams typically handle them.
In cybersecurity, closing the gap is only part of the job. Teams also need to:
Regulatory frameworks like NIST, ISO 27001, and HIPAA expect organizations not only to respond but to prove that the response was timely, effective, and complete.
Even with a well-defined process and the right tools, remediation can break down if responsibilities are unclear or execution lacks follow-through. Below are proven practices to keep your efforts focused, traceable, and aligned with both internal controls and external expectations.
Even mature organizations run into issues when trying to remediate risks at scale. Below are some of the most common roadblocks, along with practical ways to keep your remediation efforts moving.
Fix: Assign every remediation task to a single person or team. Use centralized tracking so responsibility is visible and deadlines are enforceable.
Fix: Standardize patch windows for high-priority systems and automate deployment when possible. Track exceptions with justifications, not assumptions.
Fix: Create a simple post-remediation checklist: what changed, who made the change, and where the proof is stored. Require that it be filled out before the task is marked closed.
Fix: Send mid-point reminders before due dates. For third parties, follow up with real people, not just automated emails, to confirm understanding and progress.
Fix: Use dashboards to consolidate open remediation tasks, SLA timers, and dependencies. This helps compliance and leadership teams see where things stand without chasing updates.
Fix: Create an escalation path for time extensions, require impact statements and review by risk or compliance leads before approval.
Unresolved risks do not just sit idle; they compound. They surface during audits, slow vendor reviews, and widen gaps you thought were closed. What you do after identification defines your organization’s ability to stay compliant, secure, and accountable.
Atlas Systems equips teams to follow through, not just flag issues. With ComplyScore®, you can assign remediation ownership, verify closure, and keep every update traceable. From vendor risks to internal control gaps, the platform brings structure where risk tends to slip through.
Make resolution part of your risk lifecycle, not an afterthought.
It depends on your environment. For most internal teams, quarterly reviews are standard, but if you are handling sensitive data, high-risk vendors, or running a cloud-first operation, you might need to do this monthly. The point is: frequency should match your exposure, not just your calendar.
It is usually the person or team closest to the risk. If it is a firewall misconfiguration, the network team owns it. If it is a third-party issue, the vendor management or legal lead might step in. What matters is clarity—someone needs to know they are on the hook.
Do not just check a box and move on. You should re-test the area where the issue occurred, confirm the change worked, and update your records. A note in the ticket, a screenshot, or a scan result—whatever confirms the job was done and the risk is closed.
Start with what gives you visibility. A scanner like Nessus or a tool like SentinelOne helps you spot problems early. But platforms like ComplyScore or Jira are what help teams stay on task, share updates, and show progress if someone asks for proof
Yes, and you probably should—especially for anything that gets repeated. Patching, assigning tasks, or reminding owners about deadlines are all things automation handles well. Just make sure someone is still watching the results.
6. Do remediation priorities change by industry?
Definitely. If you work in healthcare, your top priority might be encryption and patient access control. In finance, it might be closing gaps that auditors have flagged. IT and SaaS teams often focus on uptime and misconfigured permissions. What matters is aligning your fix with what would hurt your organization the most if left unresolved.