Executives and boards do not make decisions based on technical output. They make decisions based on clear evidence, risk narratives, and business impact. One of the most overlooked strengths of adversary testing is its ability to generate this kind of clarity.

This blog explains what leadership actually needs to see and how adversary simulation provides it.

The Executive View of Cyber Risk

Boards want answers to a few core questions:

• How could an attack affect the business

• How fast would we detect and contain it

• What controls are failing

• What is being done to improve resilience

• Are investments aligned to actual risk

Penetration test reports and vulnerability lists rarely answer these questions.

What an Effective Executive Summary Looks Like

Lares structures executive summaries around outcomes, not findings.

A strong summary includes:

• a narrative of the attack path

• time to detect

• impact potential based on real escalation

• control performance versus expectations

• prioritized recommendations with measurable outcomes

This is not technical detail.
It is operational risk evidence.

Why Adversary Testing Produces Better Leadership Reporting

Adversary simulation creates a single, unifying view of risk that translates across teams.

CISOs use this evidence to:

• justify investments

• align priorities

• explain technical reality in business terms

• support strategic planning

• demonstrate resilience improvements over time

Boards respond to clarity.
Adversary testing produces it.

If you would like to see what a high-quality executive summary looks like, we can share an anonymized example.