The success of the kaizen system which propelled Japanese car manufacturers to world dominance was based around giving production line workers the authority to hit the stop button if they saw something wrong. Pushing this authority low down the corporate hierarchy was counterintuitive but resulted in significant improvements in quality and efficiency. In a similar vein, in an incident response plan, the decision as to who has the authority to hit the stop button, so triggering the active incident response process, is a key one.
You can see that each stage in the incident response process has some key performance indicators (KPIs) that should be recorded and reviewed on a regular basis. As mentioned previously, false positives are very instructive. Other useful ways of quantifying performance are measures of the mean time to detection (MTTD) and mean time to resolve (MTTR) which we return to later (View #27).
One area that is often overlooked is application of lessons learned. Remedial actions are often listed as desirable in the post mortem phase, but too often these are never applied or followed up on. Time and budget need to be allocated to fix the root causes of the problems.