PECB Exam ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer Topic 2 Question 39 Discussion

Actual exam question for PECB's ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer exam

Question #: 39
Topic #: 2

[All ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer Questions]

Some of the issues being discussed in the awareness session were too technical for the participants. What does this situation indicate? Refer to scenario 6.

AEmployees are equipped with information security expertise, therefore. they do not represent a potential risk

BTradeB did not evaluate the competence of the trainer

CTradeB did not determine the type and level of competence needed

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: C

by Gaston at Jul 03, 2024, 11:40 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Isabella

4 months ago

I believe TradeB should have assessed the participants' knowledge level to ensure the session was tailored to their needs.

upvoted 0 times

...

Laurena

4 months ago

Ah, the old 'lost in translation' problem. TradeB should have gone with option C to avoid this mess.

upvoted 0 times

...

Theola

4 months ago

Maybe TradeB didn't determine the type of competence needed for the session, leading to confusion among the participants.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jackie

4 months ago

Well, well, looks like the trainer was speaking in 'techno-babble' instead of plain ol' English. C is the obvious choice.

upvoted 0 times

Adolph

3 months ago

I agree, the trainer should have tailored the content to the audience. C makes the most sense.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tammara

3 months ago

Yeah, it seems like the trainer didn't consider the participants' level of understanding. C is definitely the right answer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Edgar

3 months ago

C) TradeB did not determine the type and level of competence needed

upvoted 0 times

...

Carin

3 months ago

B) TradeB did not evaluate the competence of the trainer

upvoted 0 times

...

Alica

4 months ago

A) Employees are equipped with information security expertise, therefore. they do not represent a potential risk

upvoted 0 times

...

Lisbeth

4 months ago

Looks like TradeB forgot the golden rule: 'Keep it simple, stupid!' Option C is the way to go here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Margo

4 months ago

This is a classic case of 'too much, too fast.' The trainer needs to tailor the content to the audience's level of expertise.

upvoted 0 times

Rickie

3 months ago

This is a classic case of 'too much, too fast.' The trainer needs to tailor the content to the audience's level of expertise.

upvoted 0 times

...

Allene

3 months ago

C) TradeB did not determine the type and level of competence needed

upvoted 0 times

...

Cherry

3 months ago

B) TradeB did not evaluate the competence of the trainer

upvoted 0 times

...

Glory

4 months ago

A) Employees are equipped with information security expertise, therefore. they do not represent a potential risk

upvoted 0 times

...

Lorriane

4 months ago

The participants clearly struggled with the technical jargon. TradeB should have assessed their understanding beforehand.

upvoted 0 times

Lashawn

3 months ago

B) TradeB did not evaluate the competence of the trainer

upvoted 0 times

...

Juan

3 months ago

A) Employees are equipped with information security expertise, therefore. they do not represent a potential risk

upvoted 0 times

...

Marva

4 months ago

B) TradeB did not evaluate the competence of the trainer

upvoted 0 times

...

Myra

4 months ago

A) Employees are equipped with information security expertise, therefore. they do not represent a potential risk

upvoted 0 times

...

Nana

5 months ago

I agree with you, Hollis. It's important for the trainer to assess the level of knowledge of the participants beforehand.

upvoted 0 times

...

Hollis

5 months ago

I think the technical issues indicate that the trainer may not have evaluated the competence of the participants.

upvoted 0 times

...