Certified: The Security+ Prepcast

Security awareness training is only effective if it leads to action. That means not only helping users recognize threats, but making sure they know what to do next—and feel confident doing it. And just as important, organizations need a way to track whether their efforts are working. That’s where reporting and monitoring come in. In this episode, we’re exploring how to build clear, effective mechanisms for reporting security incidents, how to support recurring reporting practices, and how to monitor the effectiveness of training and user compliance over time.
Let’s start with initial and ongoing reporting practices. For any cybersecurity awareness program to succeed, users must know exactly how to report something when it feels suspicious. That includes phishing emails, unusual account behavior, lost devices, or conversations that raise red flags. The challenge isn’t just about recognizing threats—it’s about knowing what to do next.
Organizations need to make that process simple, accessible, and clearly communicated. If reporting a threat feels like a hassle—or worse, if people fear they’ll get in trouble—they may hesitate or avoid reporting altogether. That delay can give attackers valuable time to escalate a breach, move laterally through systems, or exfiltrate data.
So, the first step is to provide a reporting mechanism that’s easy to use. That might be a “Report Phishing” button in the email client, a short internal form that feeds into a ticketing system, or a dedicated email address managed by the security team. The key is that the process must require as little effort as possible. No one should need to dig through a handbook just to figure out where to send a suspicious message.
Let’s walk through a simple example. An employee receives an email that seems off. It looks like it’s from their manager, but the tone is strange and there’s an attachment labeled “Q4 Bonuses.” Because the employee has been trained, they hover over the email address, see it doesn’t match, and click the “Report Suspicious Email” button. Behind the scenes, that report goes straight to the security operations center, where analysts examine the headers, attachments, and source domain. The team confirms it’s part of a known phishing campaign and alerts the rest of the company. One user’s quick report protects hundreds of others.
But reporting doesn’t stop at that first alert. Ongoing reporting practices are just as important. Organizations should encourage users to submit reports even when they’re not sure something is a threat. It’s better to have a false positive than to miss an early indicator of compromise.
That’s why recurring reminders are helpful. Include a monthly message in internal newsletters, rotate banners in collaboration tools, or run short awareness campaigns that reinforce how to report suspicious activity. Highlighting “success stories” where a user’s report prevented a larger issue is a great way to build a positive feedback loop.
Some organizations even publish internal metrics—like the number of threats detected from employee reports or the average time it takes to respond to an incident. These stats aren’t just about accountability—they also reinforce that reporting matters and that users are making a difference.
Now let’s talk about monitoring effectiveness. Teaching users is important. But if we don’t measure results, we’re flying blind. How do we know if the training is working? How do we know if behavior is actually changing?
Monitoring effectiveness means evaluating whether users are applying what they’ve learned. That could mean tracking how many phishing simulations are clicked, how often users report suspicious activity, or how quickly incidents are escalated. It could also mean reviewing audit logs to see whether users are following password policies, locking screens, or accessing systems within approved hours.
Let’s take a practical example. A company launches a quarterly phishing simulation. The first round shows a click rate of twenty-seven percent, which is concerning. After a focused awareness campaign that includes training videos and follow-up messages, the next round drops to fifteen percent. By the third round, it’s down to six percent. That data tells a story. Training is having an impact, and behaviors are changing. That’s what monitoring effectiveness looks like in action.
But monitoring should go beyond click rates. For example, are employees completing required training modules on time? Are they acknowledging policies and understanding what they’ve agreed to? Are they using secure password practices? Are they reporting incidents quickly and correctly? The answers to these questions help security teams fine-tune awareness efforts and identify areas where reinforcement is needed.
It’s also important to look at qualitative feedback. After a training session or a phishing simulation, ask users what they found helpful or confusing. Were the scenarios realistic? Was the training engaging? Did it leave them feeling empowered or overwhelmed? Feedback loops like these help improve future training and ensure the content resonates with users.
Organizations should also track trends across different departments or job roles. Maybe one team has a consistently high phishing click rate. Maybe another group isn’t completing required modules. That kind of insight allows for targeted outreach, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach. And it can also surface root causes—like lack of manager support, confusing policy language, or tool limitations that prevent users from taking the right actions.
Here’s another example. A finance team is consistently late to complete security training. After a quick survey, it turns out they’re overwhelmed during quarter-end reporting cycles. The solution? Adjust the training window and send early reminders. Sometimes small operational changes can unlock much better compliance.
Monitoring also helps with accountability. When security teams present data to leadership, it’s easier to justify investments in training, awareness tools, or expanded support. If you can show that employees are reporting more incidents, completing more modules, and making fewer mistakes, that’s a story executives want to hear.
And when incidents do occur, monitoring data can help during the investigation. Logs can show whether an affected user had completed their training, reported suspicious activity earlier, or had previously been targeted. This context helps shape the response and can influence decisions about containment, communication, and recovery.
From a Security Plus exam perspective, expect questions that ask about building a culture of security reporting, measuring training effectiveness, and maintaining visibility into user behavior. If a scenario mentions encouraging users to share suspicious activity, it’s about building reporting mechanisms. If it talks about phishing simulations, module completions, or policy acknowledgements, it’s pointing to training monitoring and measurement.
Here’s a tip. If the scenario describes giving users a simple way to report threats, that’s about initial reporting mechanisms. If it discusses follow-up practices like simulations or reminders, that’s ongoing reporting. And if it involves dashboards, metrics, or reviewing user behavior, that’s monitoring effectiveness.
For downloadable reporting templates, phishing simulation trackers, and training evaluation scorecards, visit us at Bare Metal Cyber dot com. And for the most comprehensive Security Plus study resource available—with domain-by-domain coverage and realistic exam questions—head over to Cyber Author dot me and get your copy of Achieve CompTIA Security Plus S Y Zero Dash Seven Zero One Exam Success.