A Case Study in Cyber Governance: Pitney Bowes

Is it implemented its wide-sweeping digital transformation strategy, Pitney Bowes had three priorities to consider — top-line growth, cost savings, and cybersecurity — but it only chose to prioritize two, leaving vulnerable its newly expanded threat surface. Company leadership only realized the impact of this error after having to announce two incidents, which reflect poorly on the brand and its technology management. This is why it’s critical for C-suites and Boards to have improved risk tools and metrics for the “age of digital transformation” to show that they are allocating capital in the best way.

For more information, including company coverage, contact us at info@cyberhedge.com.

This information represents Cyberhedge’s opinion only and is not investment advice or an investment recommendation. See full Disclaimer.

Subscribe to know first
who is up and who is down

This article is one in a series of upcoming articles over the coming months focused on why since COVID-19 the difference between best and worst technology governance has never been more important for companies and investors alike.


Check your e-mail to confirm subscribtion

We use cookies to make our website more user-friendly and effective

The Cyberhedge Indices Cookie Policy

What are the Cyberhedge Cyber Governance Indices?

These first ever benchmarks prove good cyber governance matters to shareholder value. They measure stock market performance of companies with good and with bad cyber governance scores. Scores are based on Cyberhedge’s proprietary cyber governance rating methodology. Market performance is tracked by an independent firm. The results show that companies with good cyber governance outperform their peers in US, UK, and EU markets.

Information that we collect

Here you can see and customize the information that we collect about you. To learn more, please read our privacy policy

Continue on website