Cytactic released its 2025 State of Cybersecurity Incident Response Management (CIRM) Report, revealing incident response readiness as a critical unsolved challenge for even the most experienced: 70% of security leaders say that internal misalignment caused more chaos than the threat actor itself.
In today’s landscape of relentless and increasingly sophisticated cyber threats, organizations face not only technical challenges but also deep operational, business, and human obstacles in incident response. The research, conducted by TrendCandy of 480 senior U.S. cybersecurity leaders – including 165 CISOs – reveals a persistent breach readiness gap. While 73% describe their response plans as “technically comprehensive,” they admit plans often collapse under real-world pressure. Despite significant investments in tools, teams, and playbooks, too many organizations are paralyzed when an incident strikes, not by the attack itself, but by internal breakdowns in authority, coordination, and clarity, a gap now formally introduced by Gartner as a new category: Cybersecurity Incident Response Management (CIRM). Cytactic has been recognized by Gartner as a sample vendor in this category.
Key Findings from the 2025 State of Cybersecurity Incident Response Management (CIRM) Report:
- Leadership and authority clashes derail response
- 70% report that internal misalignment caused more chaos than the threat actor itself.
- 73% experienced CISO-CEO tension during incident response, adding stress to an already chaotic environment.
- 54% say decision ownership shifted mid-incident, creating delays.
- 41% delayed critical actions because no one knew who had final authority.
- Lack of preparation undermines readiness
- 57% faced a major incident they had never rehearsed, even though 80% say simulations dramatically improve readiness.
- Only 26% are confident in their crisis technology deployment experience, despite 94% aiming to shift from reactive to proactive response.
- Disjointed tools slow response; AI unifies action
- 67% say fragmented or complex tools slowed them.
- 93% believe AI-powered assistance could have prevented at least one major error.
- 95% are planning AI simulation investments to improve readiness.
- Translation gaps cost valuable time
- 86% say “translation time” between legal, communications, and technical teams causes costly delays.
- 24% report non-technical leaders could not interpret incident dashboards without assistance.
- Board disconnect weakens response readiness
- 83% say boards underestimate the pace and intensity of breach response.
- 78% say boards request incident updates but fail to provide clear guidance on priorities.
“To move from this chaotic reality to strategic incident response management, organizations must embrace disruptive, AI-powered technologies to minimize damage when cyber incidents strike,” said Nimrod Kozlovski, Founder and CEO of Cytactic. “The report makes it clear: preparing before and executing well at the time of an incident is critical to lessening the brand and financial damage of a cyber attack. With the vast majority of security leaders citing internal chaos due to lack of authority, clarity, and coordination under pressure, causing more chaos than the threat actor itself, the need for structured, well-orchestrated tools is undeniable.”
“Today, the CISO’s role becomes more critical than ever. We must anticipate evolving threats, foster resilience, and lead dynamic response strategies to stay ahead of attackers,” said Tim Brown, CISO of SolarWinds and Board Advisor at Cytactic. “It is clear that organizations need technological tools to fill the critical gap in incident response management. Automation, predefined plans, and AI tools will reduce that dependency on human improvisation during incidents and will allow teams to focus on managing the incident rather than improvising. The key is using technology tools to practice, prepare, plan, and use these practices to manage both minor and major incidents.”
The path forward for security leaders is clear: preparedness, operational clarity, and AI-powered assistance are essential to closing the breach readiness gap. When asked what they would change instantly if given a “magic wand,” security leaders prioritized:
- Real-time AI-generated decision guidance (65%)
- More frequent, realistic simulations (52%)
- Faster legal and communications alignment (47%)
- Seamless cross-functional coordination (46%)
Closing this gap requires a modern, orchestrated approach that unifies tools and all cross-functional stakeholders to act in sync when every second counts.
For a detailed look into the findings, download the 2025 State of Cybersecurity Incident Response Management (CIRM) Report.
