Skip to main content
Control Institute
Category: Audit Process

Preventive Action

Also known as: Preventative Action
Simply put

A preventive action is a proactive measure taken to eliminate the cause of a potential problem before it actually happens. Unlike a corrective action, which responds to something that has already gone wrong, a preventive action aims to stop an undesirable situation from occurring in the first place.

Formal definition

Preventive action is a process within a management system for identifying and eliminating the cause(s) of a potential nonconformity, hazard, or undesirable situation before it occurs. It is distinguished from corrective action by its proactive orientation: preventive action reduces the likelihood of an issue occurring (prevents occurrence), whereas corrective action addresses an issue that has already materialized and seeks to prevent its recurrence. In practice, preventive action involves identifying potential issues before they escalate into faults, failures, incidents, or accidents, and is often discussed alongside corrective action under the combined concept of CAPA.

Why it matters

Preventive action shifts a management system from a reactive posture to a proactive one. Rather than waiting for a nonconformity, incident, or failure to materialize before responding, an organization that practices preventive action identifies potential weaknesses and eliminates their causes before any harm occurs. This orientation is central to the continual improvement expected of a mature management system, and it directly complements corrective action, which addresses issues that have already happened. Together, the two are frequently discussed as the combined concept of CAPA.

The practical value is that preventing an issue from occurring is typically less disruptive and less costly than remediating one after it has escalated into a fault, failure, incident, or accident. Preventive action allows an organization to demonstrate that it monitors for emerging risks and acts on them, which supports the credibility of its control environment. In a compliance context, evidence that potential issues are identified and addressed proactively can strengthen how an ISMS or a control set is perceived during an assessment, though the specific weight given to such evidence depends on the auditor, certification body, scope, and applicable criteria.

It is important not to overstate what preventive action guarantees. Eliminating the cause of a potential problem reduces the likelihood of occurrence, but it does not assure that no undesirable situation will ever arise. Preventive action is one component of a broader improvement process and should be understood alongside corrective action rather than as a substitute for it.

Who it's relevant to

Compliance and GRC managers
Those responsible for maintaining a management system use preventive action as part of a continual improvement approach, identifying potential nonconformities and eliminating their causes before they materialize. Managing preventive and corrective action together under CAPA helps demonstrate a proactive control environment, though how such evidence is evaluated depends on the applicable criteria and the assessor.
Auditors and assessors
Auditors examining a management system may look for evidence that an organization identifies potential issues before they escalate and acts to eliminate their causes. Understanding the distinction between preventive action, which prevents occurrence, and corrective action, which prevents recurrence, allows an assessor to evaluate whether both proactive and reactive processes are functioning as intended.
Security engineers and operational teams
Teams responsible for day-to-day operations apply preventive action by spotting potential hazards or undesirable situations and addressing their root causes before they become faults, failures, incidents, or accidents. This proactive work sits alongside corrective action, which is triggered after a problem has already occurred.

Inside Preventive Action

Proactive Risk Treatment
Preventive action refers to measures taken to eliminate the cause of a potential nonconformity or other undesirable situation before it occurs, distinguishing it from corrective action, which responds to issues that have already materialized.
Relationship to Risk Assessment
In an ISO 27001 context, preventive thinking is embedded in the risk-based approach of the ISMS requirements (clauses 4 through 10), where risks are identified and treated before they lead to incidents, informed by the organization's risk assessment and Statement of Applicability.
Integration with Control Selection
Preventive measures may be implemented through reference controls selected from Annex A (93 controls organized into four themes in the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 revision, compared with 114 controls in the 2013 version), where the specific controls chosen depend on scope and risk.
Evidence of Operating Design and Effectiveness
For a SOC 2 examination, the design and, in a Type II engagement, the operating effectiveness of preventive controls over the defined review period may be assessed against the applicable Trust Services Criteria, with Security (the Common Criteria) being the only required category.
Continual Improvement Linkage
Preventive action supports the continual improvement expectations of a management system, feeding lessons learned back into monitoring, review, and updated risk treatment decisions over time.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about Preventive Action.

Is preventive action the same thing as corrective action?
No. Corrective action addresses a nonconformity that has already occurred, aiming to eliminate its cause so it does not recur. Preventive action, by contrast, is oriented toward potential nonconformities or risks that have not yet materialized, seeking to eliminate their causes before they result in an actual issue. The distinction is one of timing and trigger: corrective action responds to something that happened, while preventive action anticipates something that could happen. It is worth noting that the ISO 27001:2013 revision restructured how the concept is treated, folding much of the forward-looking, preventive orientation into the risk assessment and risk treatment processes rather than maintaining a standalone preventive action clause.
Does ISO 27001 still require a separate preventive action procedure?
Not in the way earlier management system standards did. In the current structure, the preventive intent is largely addressed through the clauses on actions to address risks and opportunities and through the risk assessment and treatment requirements, rather than through a dedicated preventive action clause. In most implementations, organizations satisfy the underlying expectation by demonstrating a functioning risk management process instead of maintaining a distinctly labeled preventive action procedure. Because interpretation can depend on the certification body and the scope of the ISMS, it is advisable to confirm expectations rather than assume a fixed documentary requirement.
How can an organization identify opportunities for preventive action?
Common inputs include the risk assessment, internal audit findings, trends observed across incidents or near-misses, monitoring and measurement data, supplier and interested-party feedback, and management review outputs. Reviewing these sources for emerging patterns, rather than isolated events, typically helps surface potential nonconformities before they occur. The specific inputs an organization relies on depend on its scope, context, and the maturity of its monitoring processes.
How should preventive action be documented for an audit?
Documentation typically shows the identified potential issue or risk, the analysis of its cause, the action taken, and evidence that the action was carried out and reviewed for effectiveness. In many engagements this is captured within the risk treatment plan and associated records rather than in a separately titled log. What auditors generally look for is traceability from the identified risk through to the action and its evaluation, though the exact form of records depends on the organization and the assessing party.
How does preventive action relate to the risk treatment process?
In the current ISO 27001 structure, the two are closely linked. Risk treatment decisions, selecting controls to modify, avoid, share, or accept identified risks, embody the preventive intent by acting on potential issues before they occur. The Statement of Applicability and the risk treatment plan often serve as the primary artifacts demonstrating this preventive orientation. In practice, organizations tend to treat effective risk management as the mechanism through which preventive action is realized.
How is the effectiveness of a preventive action evaluated?
Effectiveness is generally assessed by determining whether the potential nonconformity or risk it was intended to address has been reduced or avoided over time. This can involve reviewing subsequent monitoring data, later risk assessments, internal audit results, and management review. Because a preventive action targets something that has not yet happened, evaluation often focuses on whether the underlying risk indicators have improved rather than on the absence of a specific event. The appropriate measures depend on the nature of the risk and the organization's monitoring capabilities.

Common misconceptions

Preventive action and corrective action are the same thing.
They differ in timing and intent: preventive action addresses the cause of a potential future nonconformity before it occurs, while corrective action responds to a nonconformity that has already happened. Both may be relevant to an ISMS, but they are distinct concepts.
The 2022 revision of ISO 27001 still uses an explicit clause named 'preventive action' as in earlier practice.
Modern management system standards embed preventive thinking within the risk-based approach rather than isolating it as a standalone requirement; the terminology and structure depend on the applicable version, and control counts differ between editions (114 in the 2013 version, 93 in the 2022 version).
Implementing preventive controls guarantees no security incidents or breaches will occur.
No control approach eliminates all risk. A SOC 2 report attests only to the controls and period covered and does not guarantee freedom from breaches, and an ISO 27001 certificate covers only the defined scope of the ISMS. Preventive action reduces likelihood but does not provide an absolute assurance.

Best practices

Ground preventive measures in a documented risk assessment so that the controls selected are proportionate to identified risks and traceable through the Statement of Applicability in an ISO 27001 context.
Clearly distinguish preventive action from corrective action in your documentation, so auditors and certification bodies can see how you address potential issues versus issues that have already occurred.
Where SOC 2 is in scope, ensure preventive controls are not only well designed but also operate consistently over the defined review period, since a Type II engagement assesses operating effectiveness over time.
Specify the applicable framework version when citing control references, as control counts and structure differ between the ISO/IEC 27001:2013 and 2022 revisions.
Feed monitoring and review outputs back into risk treatment decisions to support continual improvement rather than treating preventive action as a one-time exercise.
Set expectations that preventive action reduces the likelihood of nonconformities but does not eliminate residual risk, and communicate the boundaries of any resulting report or certificate to stakeholders.