When IT reports to security, you should structure your team with clear hierarchical roles where security leadership oversees both cybersecurity strategy and IT operations. This means appointing a Chief Information Security Officer or Security Director at the top, followed by IT managers who report directly to security leadership, whilst maintaining distinct responsibilities for each function.
The traditional model of IT leading security has shifted dramatically in recent years. More organisations now recognise that security-first thinking should drive technology decisions rather than the other way around.
This organisational structure places cybersecurity professionals in leadership positions over IT departments, fundamentally changing how technology decisions are made. Instead of security being an afterthought to IT implementations, it becomes the primary consideration from the start.
The shift reflects growing awareness that cyber threats pose existential risks to businesses. When security leads IT, every technology decision gets evaluated through a risk management lens first. This approach helps prevent the common scenario where IT teams implement convenient solutions that create security vulnerabilities.
Organisations considering this structure must evaluate their current threat landscape, compliance requirements, and existing team dynamics. The decision impacts everything from daily operations to long-term strategic planning.
When IT reports to security, the Chief Information Security Officer or equivalent security leader becomes the direct supervisor of IT management, reversing the traditional hierarchy where security reported to IT leadership.
In this structure, security professionals make final decisions about:
IT managers still handle day-to-day operations, but their strategic decisions require security approval. The reporting relationship means security leaders set priorities for the entire technology function, whilst IT teams focus on execution under security-approved guidelines.
This differs significantly from traditional structures where IT leaders made technology decisions and consulted security teams for advice. Now security leaders make those decisions and direct IT teams to implement them according to security requirements.
Successful role organisation requires clear accountability between security leadership, IT management, and operational teams whilst avoiding overlap or confusion about responsibilities.
At the leadership level, your Chief Information Security Officer or Security Director becomes responsible for overall technology strategy, risk management, and compliance oversight. They set policies, approve major decisions, and ensure all technology initiatives align with security objectives.
IT managers maintain responsibility for day-to-day operations, system maintenance, and user support. However, they now report directly to security leadership and must justify technology decisions based on security impact rather than just operational efficiency.
Operational roles remain largely unchanged, but team members need clear understanding of the new approval processes. Help desk staff, system administrators, and network engineers continue their technical work but follow security-approved procedures and escalation paths.
| Role Level | Security Responsibilities | IT Responsibilities |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership | Strategic decisions, risk assessment, compliance oversight | Operational planning, resource management, execution |
| Management | Policy creation, incident response, vendor evaluation | System administration, user support, maintenance |
| Operational | Monitoring, threat detection, security controls | Technical implementation, troubleshooting, documentation |
The primary benefit is improved security posture through consistent application of security principles across all technology decisions, reducing vulnerabilities and strengthening overall cyber defences.
Key advantages include:
The biggest challenge is often cultural resistance from IT professionals who may feel their expertise is being undervalued or their autonomy reduced under security leadership.
Common obstacles include:
Start with clear communication about why you’re making this change, emphasising how it benefits both security and IT teams rather than positioning it as security taking control over IT.
Follow these implementation steps:
The decision to have IT report to security depends on your organisation’s risk profile, current security maturity, and existing team dynamics. Companies facing high cyber threats or strict compliance requirements often benefit most from this structure.
Consider your current leadership capabilities in both functions. You need security leaders with enough technical knowledge to make informed IT decisions and IT managers willing to work within security-driven frameworks.
Evaluate your organisational culture and change readiness. This structural shift requires significant cultural adaptation and works best in organisations that can manage complex change initiatives effectively.
Think about your long-term strategic goals. If cybersecurity is becoming central to your business strategy, aligning IT under security leadership makes sense. If operational efficiency is your primary concern, traditional structures might work better.
When you’re ready to build teams that can thrive in security-led environments, finding the right cybersecurity and IT professionals becomes critical. We specialise in connecting organisations with elite cybersecurity talent who understand both security leadership and collaborative IT operations, helping you build teams that excel in modern threat environments.
If you are interested in learning more, reach out to our team of experts today.
