For the CIO

The Challenge You Are Facing

The reality on the ground takes precedence over the document.

As Chief Information Officer, you now have sophisticated security tools and skilled teams at your disposal. Yet, you likely observe these realities :

• Your security systems effectively detect known threats, but struggle to identify emerging risks. You often discover incidents only after they have already had an impact. Your technical teams spend more time reacting than anticipating.

This situation stems from a fundamental limitation of current cybersecurity approaches, documented by research in crisis management and cybersecurity :

• Rigid plans fail in the face of unprecedented crises. This is what the work of Karl Weick and Patrick Lagadec on "preparation through improvisation" (Managing the Unexpected , 2001) shows.

• Centralized coordination creates bottlenecks in emergency situations, as demonstrated by studies on complex systems conducted at the Santa Fe Institute.

• Early detection often relies on weak signals perceived by field actors, not on automated alerts, a principle highlighted by Hervé Lesca and Éric Lesca in Information and Communication Management in Crisis Situations (2010).

In practical terms, you are facing several difficulties :

• Traditional security tools analyze known patterns, but innovative attacks exploit vulnerabilities that no one has yet documented.

• Your teams are often caught up in incident response activities, leaving little time for proactive monitoring.

• Security budgets are primarily allocated to protection against existing threats, with little investment in developing anticipatory capabilities.

• The increasing complexity of information systems creates blind spots that are difficult to monitor.

These findings do not call into question the competence of your teams or the quality of your tools. They reveal a structural deficiency in the way cybersecurity is generally addressed:

• The lack of systematic mechanisms to detect weak signals before they become actual threats.

Your challenge is therefore not technical, but organizational and methodological. It is about developing the collective capacity to perceive early warning signs and to react before damage occurs.

Our Response (not a solution, a capability)

These principles can be translated into concrete practices.

We are not offering an additional technical solution, new software, or a new ISO protocol. We are helping your management develop a fundamental capability :

• To perceive emerging threats before they become critical.

What we transpose

Our approach is based on three biological mechanisms validated by research :

1. Peripheral vigilance : inspired by the visual system of vertebrates

   Based on the work of David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel (Nobel Prize 1981) on visual information processing, we transpose the principles of lateral movement detection into organizational surveillance protocols.

   This vigilance does not replace your existing tools, it complements them by adding a layer of human, contextual and anticipatory detection .

   Basis : Early threat detection is a central principle of adaptive security , studied in particular in the work of the Santa Fe Institute on complex systems, and in research in behavioral cybersecurity (e.g., NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5, section "Continuous Monitoring").

   Application : we help you set up a vigilance network where each employee becomes capable of detecting and reporting subtle anomalies in their area of ​​expertise.

2. Distributed coordination : inspired by the stigmergy of social insects

   Pierre-Paul Grassé's research on termite coordination demonstrates how coordinated actions can emerge without a single command center.

   Basis : This decentralized coordination method is recognized as effective in dynamic environments, particularly in research on crisis management (Weick & Sutcliffe, Managing the Unexpected , 2001) and systems engineering (Santa Fe Institute).

   Application : we co-create with you automated action protocols that allow your teams to respond quickly to incidents without waiting for hierarchical validation.

3. Immune memory : inspired by the adaptive immune system

   Charles Janeway's work in immunobiology shows how organisms develop a memory of threats encountered.

   Application : we work with you to implement systematic incident capitalization mechanisms so that each security event sustainably strengthens your defenses.

   This memory is not archived in a report, it becomes operational :

   - it lives in your tools, your habits and your collective reflexes.

   Foundation : The idea of ​​a learning organization was formalized by Peter Senge ( The Fifth Discipline , 1990). The biomimetic approach to post-incident learning is based on the principles of ecological resilience (CS Holling, 1973) and antifragility ( NN Taleb, 2012).

What this changes

Instead of adding a tool to your existing stack, we help you to :

• ✅ Develop your teams' collective awareness of micro-signals of threat

• ✅ Streamlining decision-making in the face of new situations

• ✅ Make the lessons learned from incidents persistent

• ✅ Create a dynamic of continuous improvement in your security posture

Our honest stance

These biological mechanisms are scientifically validated. Their application to cybersecurity is innovative but based on sound principles. Together, we measure progress using concrete indicators :

• Anomaly detection time, coordinated response speed, recurrence rate of similar incidents.

We do not guarantee the absence of incidents; that would be unrealistic. We help you develop a sustainable capacity for early detection and adaptive response.

The goal is to make your IT department more resilient to threats that, by their very nature, are constantly evolving.

What we propose

These tools are not theoretical.

We offer structured support in four components, based on verified operational principles that can be adapted to your context.

Organizational vigilance audit

• Analysis of your current ability to detect weak security signals

• Evaluating decision-making processes in the face of emerging threats

• Identifying critical areas of concern in your ecosystem

• Diagnosis of post-incident learning mechanisms

This audit is based on proven assessment grids, adapted from NIST's work on cybersecurity and organizational resilience principles validated by ANSSI.

Operational support

• Gradual implementation of early detection protocols

• Developing collective vigilance skills within your teams

• Installation of adaptive coordination mechanisms

• Creation of an organizational memory of security incidents

The support respects your operational pace and integrates with your existing processes, without calling into question your current technical investments.

operational toolkit

• Weak signal monitoring protocols

• Frameworks for analyzing emerging threats

• Decision-making models in the face of uncertainty

• Post-incident learning procedures

• Capacity monitoring dashboards

These tools are inspired by biological mechanisms validated by research in immunology and neuroscience, transposed into operational practices for the IT department.

Monitoring and impact measurement

• Quarterly assessment of progress on developed capacities

• Measuring the time it takes to detect emerging threats

• Analysis of the effectiveness of the protocols implemented

• Gradual adjustments based on feedback

And most importantly :

We are not delivering a document to be archived.
We are empowering you to act, adapt, and learn on your own.

The Program

It does not depend on our expertise, but on yours.

Our approach in practice

The program for Chief Information Officers is structured in four distinct phases, each with specific objectives and concrete deliverables. The total duration is 4 to 6 months, adaptable to your operational pace.

1. Phase 1 : Assessment of current capacities (3 weeks)

   We begin by understanding your exact environment :

   Analysis of your anomaly detection processes

   Mapping your information and decision-making channels

   Identification of existing but underutilized areas of concern

   Evaluation of coordination between teams in the face of incidents

   This phase produces a shared diagnosis of your current anticipatory maturity, without value judgment.

2. Phase 2 : Protocol design (4 weeks)

   We co-develop detection and response mechanisms with your teams :

   Defining priority weak signals in your context

   Development of simple and operational rules of action

   Implementation of shared dashboards

   Formalization of graduated alert procedures

   All protocols are tested and validated with your technical teams before deployment.

3. Phase 3 : Gradual deployment (8 to 12 weeks)

   The installation is done in stages to ensure proper appropriation :

   Training targeted teams in new reflexes

   Implementation of protocols within defined scopes

   Real-time adjustments based on field feedback

   Continuous measurement of device effectiveness

   This phase alternates between workshop work and immediate application in the field.

4. Phase 4 : Transfer and autonomy (4 weeks)

   We ensure the sustainability of the capacities developed :

   Internal trainer training

   Complete protocol documentation

   Definition of monitoring indicators

   Maintenance plan for acquired skills

   We do not guarantee the elimination of all security incidents, which would be unrealistic, but a measurable improvement in your ability to anticipate and deal with them.

Duration and Investment

This program does not promise to prevent all crises. It aims to ensure that, when the unforeseen occurs, your organization is not caught off guard, not because it predicted it, but because it has learned to sense, adapt, and learn from each experience.

This approach requires a genuine willingness to listen and experiment. The results largely depend on the organization's commitment to this collective learning process.

It requires neither expensive technology nor profound reorganization. It starts with what already exists :

• People, their perceptions, and their ability to act together.

What this program is not

• ❌ This is not a standardized training program.

• ❌ This is not a compliance audit.

• ❌ This is not a promise of zero incidents.

• ❌ This is not a replacement for your existing technical tools.

What the program requires of your organization

Human commitment :

• Your availability and that of your management teams throughout the duration of the program

• The active involvement of at least ten people from different departments

• The openness to questioning certain established processes

Time commitment :

• An estimated involvement of half a day to two days per week dedicated to monitoring the program

• Regular working meetings with the operational teams

• Time dedicated to experimenting with new devices

What the program does not guarantee

We make no promises :

• The disappearance of social or organizational crises

• The detection of all weak signals

• A rapid and complete cultural transformation

• Quantifiable results in short timeframes

Operating principles

Transparency :

• All observations, analyses and recommendations are shared in real time with your team.

Adaptation :

• The program is adjusted according to your specific constraints and organizational context.

Gradual progression :

• Each step builds upon the previous one, without any abrupt break from your current practices.

Sustainability :

• The goal is to make you self-reliant in managing your forecasting capabilities, without external dependence.

Conditions for success

The organizations that benefit most from this program are those that :

• They acknowledge their current limitations in terms of anticipation

• They accept that improvement is gradual and sometimes non-linear.

• They consider anticipation as a collective skill to be developed

• They accept the element of uncertainty inherent in any learning process.

Financial commitment :

• An investment corresponding to the internal working time mobilized

• Costs related to peri-ecological support

• Any organizational adjustments identified together

• We explain in detail what is included and what is not before any commitment.

We offer you a diagnosis, an action to test, and a commitment: if it doesn't work, you stop.

To go further

Our response : to develop a capacity, not to provide a solution.

If this approach resonates with what you observe in the field, then Pericology might interest you. Not as a solution, but as a framework for reflection, experimentation, and potentially, co-creation.

Please take a few minutes to describe your situation to us.

✍️ QUESTIONNAIRE :

1. When did you identify your last disruptive threat ?

   Before it impacts your results

   When it began to have an impact

   When she was already critical

2. How do your teams react to the unpredictable ?

   Immediate adaptation without a meeting

   Rapid coordination after briefing

   Awaiting instructions

3. Are your innovation processes…

   Organic and emergent

   Structured yet flexible

   Rigid and planned

📩 Contact form

No spam. Just a helpful answer.

It doesn't commit you to anything.

It gives you a useful answer.

Contact :