The Cost of Fragmented IT Policies: Operational Inefficiency, Cyber Exposure and Audit Burden

In the public sector, IT policy fragmentation is often dismissed as an administrative inconvenience.

However, for Combined Authorities and Local Government, the reality is far more severe.

The UK latest Government’s Cyber action plan highlights fragmentation as a key operational risk, creating systemic gaps that lead to failed audits, slower incident response, and potential compliance costs.

And as the UK transitions into a new regulatory era with the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill (2025/26), the price of "institutionalised fragmentation" is set to rise. Meaning authorities need to act. 

The Audit Burden: From “Interpretation Mode” to Assurance 

IT security policies are the bridge between high-level governance and day-to-day operations. When this bridge is fractured, with different departments or councils following legacy versions, auditors are forced into "Interpretation Mode."

Instead of a streamlined review, auditors find:

• Contradictory Controls: For example - One department permitting personal device use (BYOD) while another forbids it, leading to inconsistent risk reporting.

• Siloed Evidence: Process and procedural content stored in disparate systems with no linkage to the policy content.

• Version Fog: A lack of clear audit trails showing when a policy was last reviewed or who authorised its changes.

This doesn't just increase audit time; it escalates findings and raises red flags for regulators like the Local Audit Office (LAO) and the ICO.

Cyber Exposure: The High Cost of “Ad-Hoc” Response

During a cyber incident, policies are there to provide your  baseline security detail. If  policies are outdated or inconsistent, the consequences are likely to be immediate:

• Slower triage
  Incident response teams waste critical minutes validating details with members of the wider IT team, determining escalation pathways and authority.

• Inconsistent defences
  Security patches or configuration standards may be applied unevenly across federated networks, leaving exploitable “soft spots in infrastructure and end points.

• Accountability gaps
  The CAF emphasises Outcome A1.c (Risk Management Decisions). Fragmented policies make it nearly impossible to justify risk decisions in post-breach investigations.

Operational Inefficiency and the “Tribal Knowledge” Trap

Fragmentation also amplifies operational inefficiency, particularly in environments already facing digital skills shortages. As noted by the NAO, reliance on “tribal knowledge” where only a few individuals know how processes really wors, creating hidden costs:

• Onboarding friction
  New staff and contractors struggle to navigate contradictory or siloed guidelines.

• High administrative overhead
  Senior IT leads spend time reconciling versions rather than delivering transformation.

• Insurance premium impact
  Cyber insurers increasingly demand evidence of Policy Maturity. Fragmented governance can lead to higher premiums or denial of claims following an incident.

How to Mitigate Risk with Structured Governance

To move from fragmentation to resilience, authorities must adopt a Defensible Governance model. This includes:

• Centralised policy inventory
  A single, authoritative, cloud-based repository.

• Automated review cadence
  System-driven reminders to reinforce policy hygiene and a proactive management culture to policy.

• Evidence-integrated workflows
  Mapping every policy to the standards frameworks your authority must comply with, including CAF, ISO, or PCI.

By addressing the fragmentation, authorities can not only enhance the ability manage staff behavioural expectations with clarity, govern risk and respond decisively in a crisis, but also give confidence to regulators, auditors and senior leadership. 

How Protocol Policy Systems’ PMaaS Resolves Fragmentation

Protocol Policy Systems’ Policy Management as a Service (PMaaS) is engineered to eliminate the costs of fragmentation:

• Unified baseline
  Tailored policies mapped to CAF, ISO, and PCI-DSS government bodies

• Automated version control and acceptance tracking
  Provides a single source of truth, evidencing exactly which policy version was accepted, when, and by whom removing ambiguity and strengthening audit and compliance assurance.

• Expert maintenance
  Keeps policies current with evolving regulations, freeing your team to focus on operational priorities.

Our approach not only transforms your governance into a strategic asset that reduces costs and strengthens resilience.

Find out more about our work with Combined Authorities and local government here. Or talk to one of our team to see how we can support your IT Policy requirements.

Related Articles

Explore more insights on IT policy management in local government.

Hidden Risks and Policy Sprawl: How Outdated IT Policies Undermine Assurance and Cyber Resilience in Combined Authorities

Combined Authorities and local councils are facing cyber risks that are increasing in frequency, sophistication, and impact. As digital services expand and data sharing becomes more complex...

Read More >

From IT Policy Documents to Defensible Controls: Tackling Policy Sprawl and Strengthening Assurance

A common misconception in IT governance is that a large volume of IT policy documents equates to strong security and compliance. In practice, quantity is not quality. As policy portfolios grow without structure or ownership...

Read More >

IT Policy as a Strategic Enabler: Lifecycle Management, Accountability, and Future-Proofing

The line between IT and cyber resilience and corporate risk is rapidly disappearing in the local government sector. Recent UK government publications, including the Cyber Governance Code...

Read More >