Know what OT controls apply.
Turn them into actions.
Prove compliance with evidence.

Corgenta helps industrial teams turn OT cyber obligations into assigned actions, tracked delivery, and audit-ready evidence.

Request a Cyber Delivery Gap Review

IEC 62443

Follow the risk from concern to control

See how Corgenta turns an OT cyber issue into scored risk, assigned work and evidence-backed assurance.

01

Define the threat in operational terms

02

Link it to the affected OT environment

03

Identify the weak or missing control

04

Assess likelihood, impact and exposure

05

Assign ownership and next actions

06

Keep evidence ready for assurance

Industrial cyber breaks down in delivery

Small differences in interpretation create gaps in evidence, delivery and assurance.

Corgenta gives OT cyber and GRC teams one way to turn obligations into actions, evidence and assurance.

The same standard, read differently

Without a shared model, every team can make its own judgement.

Evidence is missing or scattered

Teams receive evidence late, in mixed formats, and with no clear way to accept it.

Verification is not consistent

A working system does not always prove the cyber requirement has been met.

Exceptions are not closed out

Temporary exceptions become long-term risk when ownership, expiry and closure evidence are unclear.

Cyber ambiguity creates execution drag

It shows up as repeated interpretation, evidence chasing, verification delays and weak handover.

Schedule

Delivery dates slip when decisions, tests and dependencies are not closed.

Quality

Cyber controls become inconsistent across systems, sites and suppliers.

Cost

Cost increases through rework, change orders and late remediation.

Acceptance

Acceptance becomes harder when evidence and closure are weak.

This is not an awareness gap.
It is an execution control gap.

How ambiguity turns into project impact

Unclear cyber requirement

Project impact

Unclear requirement

Engineering time wasted

Different interpretation

Rework and delay

Evidence gaps

Acceptance delays

Verification delays

Schedule pressure

Open exceptions

Fragile assurance

Handover pressure

Weak handover

When every project answers these questions differently, cyber becomes a delivery tax.

Use one project example. We will show where time, cost and assurance are being lost.

Request a Cyber Delivery Gap Review

OT cybersecurity is not a checkpoint.
It is a governed delivery workstream.

The Corgenta OT Cyber Execution Control Model is the path that connects each cyber obligation to decisions, owners, controls, evidence and assurance.

This OT Cyber Execution Control Model is used to replace repeated interpretation with one governed path from obligation to assurance.

It connects each requirement to the decision, owner, control, evidence and approval needed to prove delivery.

One path from obligation to evidence-backed assurance.

Corgenta Execution Control Model

Obligations

Decisions

Controls

Owners

Evidence

Assurance

Requirement execution workflow

Requirement

Applies

Owner

Deliverable

Evidence

Verification

Approval

The goal is not to add more work.

It is to build OT cybersecurity into delivery from day one.

View the Corgenta Execution Control Model

One PORTFOLIO view

One DELIVERY workspace

One evidence chain

One execution model.

The right view for every role.

Corgenta keeps every role aligned to the same execution chain.
Leadership sees risk, project teams control delivery, and assurance teams trace evidence.

Corgenta turns cyber obligations into work that teams can own, track and prove.

Those obligations come from IEC 62443, NERC CIP, NCSC CAF, NIS2, customer requirements and project specifications.

It makes them executable.

  • Portfolio assurance view

    See where risk is building across projects, sites and suppliers.

    Track readiness, evidence gaps and open exceptions before they delay audit, approval or handover.

    Screen showing a text input field with the prompt: 'Make a viral ad for a hydration serum...'.

  • Project delivery workspace

    Give project and engineering teams one workspace to control cyber scope, owners, evidence and deviations through each project phase.

    Make cyber requirements clear, owned and evidenced from initiation to handover.

    Screen showing a text input field with the prompt: 'Make a viral ad for a hydration serum...'.

  • Evidence chain for assurance

    Prove what applied, who approved it, what was delivered and which evidence was accepted.

    Keep evidence ready for audit, regulatory review, supplier assurance and handover.

    Screen showing a text input field with the prompt: 'Make a viral ad for a hydration serum...'.

Start with one project.

Scale when the value is proven.

The pressure is no longer just to define cyber controls. It is to prove they are delivered.

Pick one active project.

Use its current requirements, evidence gaps and open delivery issues.

Find where cyber execution is creating delay, rework and assurance risk.

Start with an OT GRC Fit Check, then use one project to map the delivery gaps.
We show where cyber requirements create delay, rework, evidence gaps and handover risk.

01

OT GRC Fit Check

15 minutes

Confirm fit and likely use case

02

Cyber Delivery Gap Review

30 minutes & 1 project example

Map where delivery friction is building

03

Synthetic Walkthrough

30 minutes

See the model in a realistic OT project

04

Controlled pilot

30 minutes

Prove traceability from requirement to evidence

05

Scale Decision

Your timeline

Expand only if value is proven

Request a Cyber Delivery Gap Review

Use one project example to find where cyber delivery is creating delay, rework, evidence gaps and assurance risk.

Request a Cyber Delivery Gap Review