The Scaffolding Gap: 7 Questions to Ask About Your Human Risk Program’s Foundation

Every security team wants to improve their human risk management program. But very few stop to ask: what is our program actually built on?

What You'll Learn In This Blog: How to Strengthen The Foundation of Your Human Risk Program.

• Many human-risk programs look busy but are built on weak foundations—missing framework, ownership, segmentation, and measurement. cybermaniacs.com

• Ask the right foundational questions—about framework, hotspots, scaling, threat alignment and board narrative—to avoid a rickety program. cybermaniacs.com

• Move from tactically reacting with training/phishing to strategically building scalable human risk management (HRM) scaffolding.

• A resilient human risk program requires: a guiding behavioural framework, role-based segmentation, advanced measurement, cross-business ownership, scalable operations, modern threat alignment, and cohesive board-level storytelling.

• Use this blog’s seven questions as your foundation checklist to assess program maturity, identify gaps and shore up your human risk program for long-term success.

Many programs begin with noble intent—to reduce risk through awareness and education—but never develop the foundational scaffolding needed to scale. Instead, they grow reactively: a training module here, a phishing simulation there, often with no overarching strategy or unifying model. Over time, these efforts stack up like scaffolding made of mismatched pipes and rope.

The result? A rickety structure that may hold up for a while—but it’s one storm away from collapse.

At Cybermaniacs, we see this every day: companies with strong commitment but shaky foundations. To help security leaders assess the strength of their scaffolding, here are seven hard-hitting questions to ask.

1. What Framework Guides Your Human Risk Program?

If your answer involves checklists or compliance requirements, you’re not alone. But frameworks should go beyond ticking boxes. A mature program uses a behavioral framework that links activities to measurable outcomes. Whether it’s competency-based models, psychological behavior stages, or culture-informed mapping—you need a skeleton before you can add muscle.

2. Do You Know Your Risk Hotspots by Role, Region, or Function?

Human risk isn’t evenly distributed. Some roles have more access, more power, or more exposure. Mature programs map risk by human factors: what people do, where they work, and how they interact with systems. If you’re still running generic, one-size-fits-all training, your scaffolding isn’t aligned to your actual threat surface.

3. Are You Measuring Culture, Behavior, and Competency—or Just Completions?

Completion rates tell you who clicked. They don’t tell you who’s vulnerable, resistant, or silently disengaged. If your scaffolding includes measurement tools, it should track culture signals, competency evolution, and behavior change over time. This is how you build for long-term resilience, not just short-term compliance. For more information on this topic try reading our blogs "Patch the Human OS: A Roadmap for Programmatic Behavior Change"which covers programmatic behavior change as the next step in human risk maturity, or if you're interested in moving beyond awareness toward behavioral resilience try "Beyond Awareness: How CISOs Can Drive Behavioral Resilience in 2025".

4. Who Owns Human Risk Across the Business?

Ownership is often a missing beam. If the program lives only within the infosec or training team, it lacks the cross-functional strength required for change. Executive sponsorship, department alignment, and business-wide clarity on roles and responsibilities are essential.

5. Can Your Program Scale Without Burning Out Your Team?

If your scaffolding requires manual effort to run simulations, manage content, or build campaigns, it’s going to crumble as you grow. Look at where your people are spending their time. Is it strategic work, or are they duct-taping platforms together? Scalability starts with operational efficiency and support. For more information on scaling a human risk management program, read our blog "Adaptive Enablement: A Modern Playbook for Scaling Human Risk Programs".

6. Is Your Approach Designed for Today’s Threat Landscape?

Legacy awareness programs were built for legacy threats. Today’s environment demands design thinking: personalization, adaptive content, behavioral segmentation. If your scaffolding hasn’t evolved since 2018, it’s not ready for deepfakes, AI-driven attacks, and hybrid work complexity.

7. Are You Able to Tell a Cohesive, Board-Level Story?

Scaffolding isn’t just for delivery—it supports storytelling. Mature programs create clear narratives that connect metrics to outcomes, and outcomes to business value. If you can’t explain your human risk maturity in one slide, the foundation needs work. For more help in demonstrating board-level value from human risk programs read our blog "Proving the Value: A CISO’s Guide to Human Risk ROI for the Boardroom"

Call to Action

We help organizations move from awareness activity to HRM maturity—with science-backed frameworks, diagnostic assessments, operational support, and creative campaign delivery.

Want to know where your program scaffolding stands? We’ll show you what’s working, what needs shoring up, and how to build for the future.

Talk to our team or follow us on LinkedIn to learn how we make security programs resilient, not rickety.

Key Takeaways: Building a Scalable, Measurable Human Risk Program

1. Start with a framework, not checkboxes. Training and awareness alone won’t scale; you need a behavioural framework linking human risk to measurable outcomes. cybermaniacs.com

2. Risk isn’t uniform. Human-risk hotspots differ by role, region and function. Generic training = inadequate scaffolding. cybermaniacs.com

3. Measure what matters. Reporting completions is not enough—it’s time to track culture, behaviour, competency and risk signals. cybermaniacs.com

4. Ownership and scalability matter. Human-risk programmes require executive sponsorship, cross-business alignment, and operational efficiency to scale. cybermaniacs.com

5. Threat landscape has changed. Scaffolding designed pre-2020 is likely obsolete in the era of hybrid-work, deepfakes and AI social engineering. cybermaniacs.com

6. Tell a board-ready story. The foundation isn’t just about delivery—it’s about narrative: metrics, risk, business value. Without it, your programme may collapse. cybermaniacs.com

7. Use the 7-question checklist as your audit tool. These questions help you benchmark where your human-risk scaffolding stands and what needs shoring up.

FAQ: Understanding the Maturity Gap in Human Risk Management Programs

What is the “scaffolding gap” in human-risk programmes?

The “scaffolding gap” refers to the weak foundational structure of many human-risk or security awareness programs—built on ad-hoc training and simulations rather than a unified framework, role segmentation, behavior measurement, business alignment and scalable operations. cybermaniacs.com

Why do many human-risk programs struggle to scale?

Because they lack scalability-focused design: no cross-business ownership, too much manual intervention, generic content, and no prioritization of high-risk roles or modern threats. This mismatch creates a brittle structure that can’t keep up with evolving risk. cybermaniacs.com

What measurements should mature human-risk programs use instead of completions?

Mature programs track behavioral change, cultural indicators, role-based risk metrics, engagement trends, incident linkages and board-level narrative rather than just completion or click-rates. cybermaniacs.com

How does ownership structure impact the success of a human-risk program?

If the program is siloed in infosec or training only, it lacks the cross-organizational support needed. Executive sponsorship, clear accountability across the business, and alignment with other risk teams strengthen the foundation of the program. cybermaniacs.com

What question should I ask to determine if my human-risk framework is up-to-date for today’s threat landscape?

Ask: “Is our program designed for today’s threat landscape—deepfakes, AI social engineering, hybrid work and dynamic roles—or is it still built on the 2010s model of annual training and phishing simulations?” If the answer leans old-model, your scaffold needs reinforcement. cybermaniacs.com