There is a growing problem in cybersecurity today, especially within organizations: compliance is increasingly treated as a checkbox exercise instead of a method for strengthening real security.
Many companies rush to “pass the audit,” “earn the certification,” or “become compliant,” but few stop to ask the most important question:
Does our security program actually work?
When compliance becomes the end goal, rather than a mechanism for building maturity, security efforts begin moving in the wrong direction. Policies are written to impress auditors, not protect systems. Controls are documented without understanding how those systems operate. Risk decisions are made without a realistic sense of how attackers would actually exploit weaknesses in the environment.
And the outcome is predictable:
- A perfectly documented compliance package
- Infrastructure that remains vulnerable to threats
This breakdown happens when GRC becomes detached from the technical reality of the organization. Frameworks like CMMC, NIST, ISO, and SOC 2 were never intended to be finish lines or trophies. They are baselines. They are foundations meant to guide continuous improvement.
Compliance only becomes meaningful when paired with:
- A real understanding of how systems function
- A culture that prioritizes learning over box-checking
- Genuine collaboration between GRC and technical teams
My Experience
I have worked with clients in both government and private sector, and the way compliance is often approached is alarming. A c-suite executive once directed the compliance team:
“We need to get this package submitted so that we can continue to operate, even though all the policies we have are outdated.”
In other words, the strategy was: get something submitted and worry about maturity later (if at all). When leadership views compliance as a hurdle instead of an opportunity to improve security, failure is inevitable. Tasks aren’t being done for the right reasons, and employees develop a skewed understanding of what compliance is supposed to accomplish.
When leaders champion the right purpose, the culture shifts from:
“Did we check the box?”
to
“Is this actually protecting us?”
At that point, compliance becomes the natural result of doing security the right way.
CMMC, NIST, ISO, and similar frameworks can absolutely strengthen organizations, but only when applied with understanding, trust, and continuous improvement. Compliance is not the goal. Security is the goal. And when organizations treat GRC as a mechanism for real insight, not just documentation, compliance becomes easier, more meaningful, and far more effective.
Final Thought
I’ve been working with NIST SP 800-53 and NIST SP 800-171 controls throughout my entire career. If you’re looking to use these frameworks to actually guide and mature your security program, not just pass an audit, I’d be glad to help. Feel free to reach out with any questions.
Daniel Elice 
Leave a comment