“Organisations should be doing more to achieve privacy accountability” asserts GPEN

The Global Privacy Enforcement Network’s (GPEN) annual intelligence gathering operation has looked at how well organisations have implemented the core concepts of accountability into their own internal privacy policies and programmes. The joint study, known as the ‘GPEN Sweep’, is carried out by data protection regulators across the globe and, this year, examines how they have taken responsibility for complying with data protection laws.

While there were examples of good practice, it was found that a number of organisations had no processes in place to deal with the complaints and queries raised by data subjects, and were not equipped to handle data security incidents appropriately.

Adam Stevens, head of intelligence at the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), said: “The findings suggest that, while organisations contacted by the ICO and our international partners have a good understanding of the basic concept of accountability, in practice there’s significant room for improvement. It’s important that organisations have appropriate technical and organisational measures in place. This includes having clear data protection policies, taking a ‘data protection by design and default’ approach and continuing to review and monitor performance and adherence to data protection rules and regulations.”

‘GPEN Sweep’: the key results

Participating GPEN members made contact with 356 organisations in 18 countries during the ‘sweep’ exercise and have arrived at the following conclusions:

*When it comes to monitoring internal performance in relation to data protection standards, many organisations were found to fall short, with around a quarter who responded having no programmes in place to conduct self-assessments and/or internal audits

*Organisations were generally found to be quite good at giving data protection training to staff, but often failed to provide refresher training for existing staff

*The organisations that indicated they have monitoring programmes in place generally gave examples of good practice, noting that they conduct annual audits or reviews and/or regular self-assessments

*Nearly 75% of organisations across all sectors and jurisdictions had appointed an individual or team who would assume responsibility for ensuring compliance with relevant data protection rules and regulations

*Over 50% of those organisations surveyed indicated they’ve documented incident response procedures nd that they maintain up-to-date records of all data security incidents and breaches. However, a number of organisations indicated they have no processes in place to respond appropriately in the event of a data security incident

National findings

In terms of national findings, the ICO made contact with 28 organisations across various sectors in the UK and has come to the following conclusions:

*Only 67% of organisations who provided a response said that they conduct regular self-assessments or audits of internal data protection standards and practices, while only 67% indicated they maintain inventories of personal data held

*83% of UK organisations who responded to the ICO’s queries indicated that they’ve implemented an internal data privacy policy and ensure that staff receive data protection training

*It was positive to note that 100% of organisations in the UK who provided a response indicated they felt they had someone within the organisation at a sufficiently senior level responsible for privacy governance and management

As a result of the investigation, individual GPEN members may contact organisations in their own countries to assess what remedial action they need to take in order to improve user controls over personal information.

About the Author
Brian Sims BA (Hons) Hon FSyI, Editor, Risk UK (Pro-Activ Publications) Beginning his career in professional journalism at The Builder Group in March 1992, Brian was appointed Editor of Security Management Today in November 2000 having spent eight years in engineering journalism across two titles: Building Services Journal and Light & Lighting. In 2005, Brian received the BSIA Chairman’s Award for Promoting The Security Industry and, a year later, the Skills for Security Special Award for an Outstanding Contribution to the Security Business Sector. In 2008, Brian was The Security Institute’s nomination for the Association of Security Consultants’ highly prestigious Imbert Prize and, in 2013, was a nominated finalist for the Institute's George van Schalkwyk Award. An Honorary Fellow of The Security Institute, Brian serves as a Judge for the BSIA’s Security Personnel of the Year Awards and the Securitas Good Customer Award. Between 2008 and 2014, Brian pioneered the use of digital media across the security sector, including webinars and Audio Shows. Brian’s actively involved in 50-plus security groups on LinkedIn and hosts the popular Risk UK Twitter site. Brian is a frequent speaker on the conference circuit. He has organised and chaired conference programmes for both IFSEC International and ASIS International and has been published in the national media. Brian was appointed Editor of Risk UK at Pro-Activ Publications in July 2014 and as Editor of The Paper (Pro-Activ Publications' dedicated business newspaper for security professionals) in September 2015. Brian was appointed Editor of Risk Xtra at Pro-Activ Publications in May 2018.

Related Posts