Effective Strategies University Information Technology Leaders Use to Prevent or Mitigate Cyberattacks’ Costs

Effective Strategies University Information

Technology Leaders Use to Prevent or Mitigate

Cyberattacks’ Costs

Section 1: Foundation of the Study

Cyberattacks against academic institutions continue to incapacitate educational

growth because of attacks on institutional and personal data. Academic institution leaders

are under pressure to prevent cyberattacks (Fouad, 2021). Cyberattacks progressively

damage networks and systems and are universally growing in number and severity (Rakas

et al., 2020). The fact that academic institutions hold staff and students’ sensitive data and

depend on information systems in daily activities makes them prime targets for

cyberattacks. However, educational institutions often lack the essential resources to

deploy emerging cybersecurity methods and exploit business opportunities (Shlomo et al.,

2021). This study was conducted to identify and explore effective strategies IT leaders of

universities in Cameroon use to prevent or mitigate cyberattack costs.

This section gives a general overview of this study and the problem addressed

therein. The remainder of Section 1 comprises the background, the business problem, and

the purpose that explains the study’s intent. This section includes the study population

and sampling, the method and design for the study, the research questions, the conceptual

framework, the significance of the study, a list of relevant definitions of terms used in

this study, and the assumptions and limitations of this study.

Background of the Problem

Cybersecurity is a global concern, and organizations everywhere need solutions

that work for them. In recent years, many new and evolving cybersecurity threats have

put the worldwide information security industry on security alert (Shlomo et al., 2021).

Intellectual cyberattacks involving malware, phishing, machine learning, artificial

intelligence, cryptocurrency, and others have placed the data and assets of businesses,

governments, and individuals at constant risk (Shlomo et al., 2021). For example, in April

2011, Sony had a PlayStation Network attack, Equifax had a March 2017 data breach

with more than 145.5 million accounts compromised, and as a result of evidence linking

Russia’s interference in the United States election campaign, the U.S. government

remains on security alert (Alraja et al., 2023). Marriott International also suffered a

massive data breach in the United Kingdom in 2016, affecting as many as 500 million

guests (Peterson et al., 2022). In 2017, in Cameroon, a country in the sub-Saharan

African region, a cybersecurity student hacked 10 government websites overnight

(Boraine & Doris, 2019). From 2015 to 2017, five cybersecurity incidents occurred in

universities in Cameroon (Kessi et al., 2020).

Prior researchers have focused on the cybersecurity concerns of typical Western

organizations. For example, Whitman and Mattord (2022) examined information security

management in small enterprises in the United States and found that acceptable security

compliance practices, implementation of security policies, and security awareness were

significant countermeasures for preventing cyberattacks. Alraja et al. (2023) researched

cybersecurity in higher education in Colorado and found that due diligence and oversight

controls are central to securing a technological environment alert. Har et al. (2022)

conducted an exploratory analysis of information security management in Australian

universities. Har et al. developed a security management model to facilitate the transition

of expert security practitioner knowledge into implementation.

The governmental structure of Cameroon is a notable factor that one must

consider when studying or exploring cybersecurity management in this country. A

country’s unique cultural, political, and legal systems may alter how leaders of

organizations manage cybersecurity. The prevailing view among citizens is that laws are

mere formalities. The inhabitants in Cameroon view regional and local rules as more

relevant and valuable than national-level laws and regulations. Regional and local

provisions supersede national-level laws and regulations (Kessi et al., 2020). Cameroon is

bicultural and bilingual because of the prolonged colonial administration of the British

and French. Cameroon gained independence in 1961, less than six decades ago. Based on

the colonial legacies, Cameroon’s various systems of practice convey its dual cultural and

linguistic colonial background (Kessi et al., 2020).

Cameroon’s unique cultural, economic, and political system significantly

influences how IT leaders implement cybersecurity controls to prevent emerging

cyberattacks in Cameroon. Cameroon is a developing country lacking resources and

technology, and Cameroon’s unique cultural, political, and legal systems affect

universities more than typical organizations. The universities are owned and controlled by

the government. The government has more influence on how university administrators

and security managers manage cybersecurity activities in their institutions (Kessi et al.,

2020). University institutions are becoming political targets and vulnerable to

cyberattacks because the government controls them. The Cameroon educational sector

operates in two subsystems, the French and the English systems, with diverse curricular,

structural, and organizational patterns. Allocating resources to cybersecurity should be a

top priority of any manager. But universities’ IT leaders lack the resources and the

necessary technology to fight against cyberattacks (Kessi et al., 2020). Therefore, my

objective in this study was to explore strategies that IT leaders of universities in

Cameroon use to prevent or mitigate the costs of cyberattacks.

Problem and Purpose

Cyberattacks pose a significant threat to university institutions as universities

increasingly rely on computer networks to conduct day-to-day business activities

(Tayaksi et al., 2022). Cyberattack incidents increased by 125% through 2020, and

increasing volumes of cyberattacks continued to threaten businesses and individuals in

2021 (Al-Ghamdi, 2021). Globally, 79% of business organizations have not developed a

response strategy to cyberattacks (Tayaksi et al., 2022). The general business problem

was that university institutional leaders faced a rising risk of cyberattacks that could result

in increased loss of sensitive data, identity theft, and derivative costs. The specific

business problem was that some information technology (IT) leaders in Cameroon

universities lack effective strategies to prevent or mitigate cyberattack costs.

The purpose of this qualitative pragmatic inquiry was to explore the effective

strategies IT leaders of universities in Cameroon use to prevent or mitigate cyberattack

costs. This study’s population comprised eight IT leaders from universities in Cameroon

with more than 5 years of experience in cybersecurity management and used effective

strategies to prevent cyberattacks. IT leaders were suitable participants for this study

because of their knowledge and experiences in preventing and mitigating cyberattacks.

This study’s findings could be valuable to IT leaders and cybersecurity professionals to

plan and implement effective strategies to prevent cyberattacks. This study’s findings

may contribute to a positive social change by giving university IT leaders confidence and

the necessary procedures to safely secure students’ and staff’s sensitive data and improve

the economy’s health. Furthermore, positive social change can result from providing a

safe and secure learning environment for universities to conduct daily business activities.

Population and Sampling

This study’s population comprised IT leaders, IT managers, and chief information

officers (CIOs) in universities across Cameroon. This study’s participants were eight IT

leaders, IT managers, and CIOs with at least 5 years of experience in cybersecurity

management. These participants were significant in addressing the research problem

because universities assume abundant information security policy compliance. IT leaders

such as security managers contributed to this study because they manage cybersecurity

functions in their respective institutions. To participate in this study, the individual had to

be an IT leader with at least 5 years of experience in cybersecurity management and must

have used effective strategies to prevent cyberattacks. The participant also needed to be

25 or older. I used purposeful sampling to recruit participants familiar with what the

university has done for cybersecurity. I continuously selected participants until I reached

enough agreeable participants to meet the determined sample size and achieve data

saturation. Six participants per group is recommended minimum number to enter the data

saturation point in a typical qualitative study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

Nature of the Study

The research methods researchers use include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods (Yin, 2018). I used the qualitative method for this study. Researchers use the

qualitative approach to describe the phenomena under study (Hamilton & Finley, 2019).

The qualitative method was suitable for this study because I sought to identify and

explore effective strategies that Cameroon university IT leaders used to prevent or

mitigate the costs of cyberattacks. A qualitative approach is appropriate when a thorough

understanding of an issue is necessary (Andrews, 2021). Addressing the research question

required an in-depth analysis of the participants’ experiences. The qualitative approach

was appropriate for this study because it enabled the researcher to gather participant data

through individual interviews. In contrast, researchers use the quantitative method to test

hypotheses or examine the relationships among variables (Huyler & McGill, 2019),

which was unsuitable for this study. Researchers use the mixed method when the research

question, objective, and context require hypothesis testing and an in-depth analysis of

participants’ experiences (Sim, 2020). The mixed method approach was unsuitable for

this study because the research question, objective, and context did not require such an

approach.

Some of the qualitative research designs researchers use include pragmatic

inquiry, ethnography, phenomenology, and narrative designs (Johnson & Christensen,

2020). I used a pragmatic inquiry design for this study. Researchers use pragmatic inquiry

to answer research questions on what, how, or why (Ridder, 2020). Pragmatic inquiry

enables researchers to determine the reasons for a phenomenon through interviews,

participants’ observations, and field notes (Taguchi, 2018). A natural environment allows

participants to express their views and thoughts (Kelly & Cordeiro, 2020). Pragmatic

inquiries are a method for eliciting data through introspection using semistructured

interviews and thinking-aloud protocols to enable researchers to gain insight into

participants’ perceptions of their actions (Makin, 2021). The pragmatic inquiry design

was appropriate for this study because it is an inductive approach that allowed me to

identify, explore, and compare the effective strategies IT leaders of universities in

Cameroon use to prevent or mitigate the costs of cyberattacks.

Researchers use the ethnographic method to understand how behaviors reflect a

group’s culture (Institutional Ethnography, 2020). The ethnographic design was not

suitable for this study because the intent was not to study the behavior and culture of

participants in this study. Researchers use a phenomenological design to understand lived

experiences from a participant’s perspective (Balikçi, 2022). The phenomenological

design was unsuitable for this study because I did not plan to study the lived experiences

of people or groups of individuals. I used the pragmatic inquiry for this study to identify

and explore the strategies IT leaders of universities in Cameroon use to prevent or

mitigate cyberattack costs.

Research Question

This study’s overarching research question was “What strategies do IT leaders of

universities in Cameroon use to effectively prevent or mitigate the costs of cyberattacks?”

Interview Questions

I used the interview questions below to address the research problem and answer

the research question:

1. What strategies do you use to prevent cyberattacks in your institution?

2. How effective or successful are these strategies?

3. What challenges do you encounter implementing these Strategies?

4. What training do you have for your staff and students to fight against

cyberattacks?

5. What policies and procedures have you adopted to address cyberattacks in

your institution?

6. What additional information would you like to share regarding your strategies

to prevent cyberattacks in your institution?

7. Is there anything else you would like to add?

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study anchored on systems theory postulated by

Von Bertalanffy. In 1968, Bertalaffy proposed the systems theory to describe the

principle that the parts of a system can best be understood in the context of the

relationships with each other and other systems rather than in isolation (Adams et al.,

2014; Bertalanffy, 1968). The central tenet of the systems theory is that a complete

system has interrelated parts instead of defining a system as individual parts. Systems

theory is used in several fields, such as sciences, humanities, and technology (Adams et

al., 2014; Bertalanffy, 1968). Systems theory has four main concepts: input, output,

feedback, and environment (Hartnell et al., 2019). Systems theory is a combination of

interactions used to expand an individual’s ability to recognize and comprehend systems

while forecasting the performances and adjusting the systems to deliver the anticipated

outcomes (Zhu, 2022).

Systems theory was suitable for this study because the theory is a holistic

approach that views a complete information security system as contrary to viewing the

parts as distinct entities. Understanding a whole system decreases the complexity of

comprehending multiple parts of a system (Zhu, 2022). Integrating systems theory in this

study assisted in exploring strategies to influence the system’s interconnections,

feedback, and different performances. Recognizing interconnections and input in a

system contributed to getting a better understanding of the system structure and allowed

me to identify the organizational strength and weaknesses in designing and implementing

these strategies (Zhu, 2022). System theory was also suitable for this study because it

facilitated a proper understanding of the effective strategies IT university leaders could

use to prevent or mitigate cyberattacks.

Operational Definitions

The following definitions of terms applied to this study.

Artificial intelligence: Developing computer systems that can perform tasks

requiring human intelligence (Kizza, 2020).

Cyberattack: Invasion of computer or network devices by unauthorized

individuals to cause harm to the system (Y. Li & Liu, 2021).

Cybersecurity: Cybersecurity refers to tools, policies, software, and processes in

place to prevent or defend against malware and cyberattacks (Corallo et al., 2022).

Cybersecurity strategy: Cybersecurity strategies serve as a blueprint for building

an effective, collaborative, enterprise-wide posture and defense against cyber threats

(Bhamare et al., 2020).

Governance: The act of using regulations, internal policies, standards, and

procedures (Tahir, 2018).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

As with any qualitative study, assumptions, and limitations affected this study;

mitigating these assumptions and constraints increased the validity of the research and

prevented undue bias on my part.

Assumptions

This qualitative pragmatic inquiry was based on the following research

assumptions. I assumed that the conceptual framework for the analysis was valid. I also

assumed that participants spoke openly and honestly to ensure that information is

protected. The respondents in this study were not subjected to social desirability bias.

Given that respondents were asked about cyberattack prevention in their institutions, they

experienced a need to answer more favorably because of control or peer pressure.

Limitations

The empirical results reported should be considered in light of some restrictions.

The primary impediment to these results’ generalization was that the sample size did not

allow the transferability of findings to a general population in qualitative research. The

research question and the conceptual framework created boundaries and limitations as the

review explicitly focused on preventing cyberattacks within universities in Cameroon. I

acted as the primary instrument for data collection and analysis.

This study’s sample was limited to IT leaders of universities in Cameroon. This

limitation was essential to control the scope, but other institutions or universities had

different methods or concerns. Positivist researchers find pragmatic inquiry inadequate

because they do not provide evidence of causal connections; using the pragmatic inquiry

method precludes any external validity (Chang et al., 2020). In a qualitative study, given

the reliance on participants’ perceptions and opinions, subjectivity and imprecision exist

that limits the possibility of confirming results (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

Delimitations

Delimitations are the limits set by the researcher such that the study objective will

be practically achievable (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). First, I delimited this study to

universities in Cameroon with an enrollment of over 5000 students. Second, I delimited

the study to IT leaders who must have implemented effective strategies to prevent

cyberattacks.

Significance of the Study

Contribution to Business Practice

It is estimated that business leaders would have to spend over $3.8 million to

recover from a security breach. (Ho et al., 2023). Modern technology and innovations can

keep business organizations safe and secure from cyberattacks (Meng et al., 2023).

Business leaders need effective strategies to prevent the risk of cyberattacks. This study

was significant because the findings could help cybersecurity managers in universities by

providing strategies, processes, and practical techniques needed to prevent or mitigate the

costs of cyberattacks. Universities use network systems and data security to conduct

dayto-day activities (Meng et al., 2023). Data security breaches can result in significant

data loss, identity theft, ineffective systems, and derivative costs. Implementing effective

security strategies could lead to effective business practices by preventing and mitigating

the effects of cyberattacks and should improve business performance. The findings of this

study complement the existing literature focusing on typical Western organizations.

Results showed how organizations in unique cultural, political, and legal systems prevent

or mitigate cyber threats.

Implications for Social Change

This study’s findings may contribute to a positive social change by giving

university leaders confidence and the necessary procedures to safely secure students,

staff’s sensitive data, and improve the economy’s health (Grewal et al., 2020).

Furthermore, positive social change is implied through providing a safe and secure

learning environment for universities to conduct daily business activities.

A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature

Introduction

Data breaches result in increased loss of sensitive data, identity theft, and business

profitability (Trumbach et al., 2023). Emerging cyberattacks pose a significant threat to

university institutions as universities increasingly rely on computer networks to conduct

day-to-day business activities (Tayaksi et al., 2022). Cyberattack incidents increased by

125% through 2020, and increasing volumes of cyberattacks continued to threaten

businesses and individuals in 2021 (Al-Ghamdi, 2021). The urgency to strengthen data

security in university institutions increased as universities rely on technology and are the

prime target for hackers (Alarifi, 2023). This qualitative pragmatic inquiry identified the

strategies of IT leaders of universities in Cameroon to prevent or mitigate emerging

cyberattacks. This study complements prior studies that focused on typical organizations

in Western countries.

This literature review aims to present and discuss related issues and findings of

previous studies relevant to this study. I recognized gaps in the past and current literature

to validate the significance of this study. The literature analysis for this study began with

a search of the university library databases: Google Scholar, SAGE journals, Digital

Library, and books. I applied the Walden University Summons tool in all library

searches; I used this tool to search multiple databases in a single request. The database

searched in this literature review includes ProQuest, EBSCOhost, Science Direct, and

JSTOR. I used the Summons tool scholarly and peer-reviewed options to refine the search

to peer-review and academic journals and limited the search results to studies published

within the last 7 years. I used these databases to explore both current and seminal works

regarding cybersecurity management.

The keywords used for searching the literature for this study are systems theory,

cyberattack, cyber impact, information security risk, privacy and protection, Chief

information security officer, cybersecurity, systems theory, artificial intelligence, and

strategies for data security. I conducted 60 searches using the Google Scholar search

engine with the exact keywords and combinations. This additional search allowed me to

identify any literature that may have been left out in the previously searched databases. I

searched the Sage Knowledge and Sage Research Methods databases to develop this

study’s research design and understand less standard research methodologies, models,

and related terms discovered in the existing literature under review. I retrieved more than

1,000 articles in the queries from all databases. After reviewing the abstracts and delving

into related articles to determine their relevance, I found 168 articles relevant to this

study, and the articles were downloaded for inclusion in the literature review. According

to Walden University’s DBA program, 85% of the referenced sources have been

published within the past five years, enhancing the relevance and currency of the

academic argument (Walden University, 2023). I used various sources in my literature

review, most of which are peer-reviewed and published between 2019 and 2023. As a

part of the literature review, academic books, dissertations, and data articles were also

reviewed (see Table 1).

Table 1

Literature Review Content

Category Result

Total number of references 168

Number of references within five years 148

Number of peer-reviewed references 160

Percentages of references with five years 88.10%

Percentages of peer-reviewed references 95.2%

The literature review of this study began with searching presenting sources,

databases, and keywords used to search peer-reviewed and scholarly journals for studies

published within the last 5 years. The specific sections in the review of literature are the

following: systems theory, the concept of cybersecurity, social media, and cybersecurity

risks on universities, emerging trends in cybersecurity, effects of cyberattacks on the

universities, and IT strategies for preventing and mitigating cyberattacks. The last section

is a summary of the literature review and transition to the next section.

System Theory

The theory that grounds this study includes the system theory postulated by Von

Bertalanffy in 1968. Systems theory describes the principle that the parts of a

system can best be understood in the context of the relationships with each other

and other systems rather than in isolation (Adams et al., 2014; Bertalanffy, 1968).

Systems theory was first developed to comprehend organisms in the field of

biology but was later extended beyond the field of biology to study several areas

(Klier et al., 2022). Business leaders use systems theory to explore people’s

actions in diverse fields, such as sciences, humanities, and technology (Adams et

al., 2014; Bertalanffy, 1968).

The central tenet of the systems theory is that a complete system has interrelated

parts instead of defining a system as individual parts. According to Bertalanffy (1968),

systems are open or closed systems thinking. In available systems, the inputs interact with

the environment; in secure systems, there is no interaction between the information and

the environment (Klier et al., 2022). Organizational leaders choose open systems over

closed systems because open systems facilitate interaction with other business operations

and subsystems. The subsystems intermingle with the environment.

Organizations are considered open systems, hence interacting with their environment.

The organization’s interaction with its environment helps to identify which component of

the system is not working at total capacity, thus affecting the overall productivity or

functionality of the system (Thimm, 2022). For instance, open systems allow university

leaders to interact with shareholders, students, and faculties in business organizations

such as universities. Closed systems are autonomous, hence not requiring interaction with

the environment to function (Klier et al., 2022).

Systems theory has four main concepts: input, output, feedback, and environment

(see Figure 1). The input and output components are carriers of data that enable system

openness to determine the quantity and frequency of information transported through the

System and feedback are output information loaded into the system as input (Adams et

al., 2014). Business leaders apply feedback to comprehend the performance or efficiency

of information in a system (Klier et al., 2022). Using the information in a system can

result in positive or negative changes within a system. Positive feedback is experienced

when the system functions appropriately without interruption, while negative feedback is

when the data path is disrupted (Zhu, 2022). Systems theory is a combination of

interactions used to expand an individual’s ability to recognize and comprehend systems

while forecasting the performances and adjusting the systems to deliver the anticipated

outcomes (Zhu, 2022).

Figure 1

System Theory Central Tenets

Note. The system theory central tenets. Adapted from “Systems Theory as the Foundation

for Understanding Systems” by K. M. Adams, P. T., Hester, J. M. Bradley, T. J. Meyers,

and C. B. Keating, 2014, Systems Engineering, 17(1), p.

134.1https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21255

When IT leaders view the organization as a complex system, some vital concepts

include open systems, synergy, and subsystems. Open systems interrelate with their

environment to determine their best fit (Klier et al., 2022). Most business institutions are

regarded as open systems and interact with their environment. Thus, systems theory is

used to examines complex systems such as hospitals, educational institutions, and

companies (Vanderstraeten, 2019). Based on an extensive literature review, university

institutions can be viewed as open systems through the lens of systems theory. The

interaction with the environment helps to identify which component of the system is not

working at full capacity, thus affecting the overall productivity or functionality of the

system.

Most organizations also comprise subsystems (Klier et al., 2022). Through the

lens of systems theory, the organization is considered a purposeful system of

interconnected subsystems working together to accomplish the organizational goals, and

any modification in one subsystem affects the organization (Klier et al., 2022). Synergy is

also another crucial element of complex systems; the organizational subsystems achieve

more when they work harmoniously (Hartnell et al., 2019). Applying a systems theory

concept can enable the researcher to comprehend the root cause of a problem and find

possible solutions to make the system more efficient and reliable. According to systems

theory, nothing can be understood in separation; instead, it should be viewed as a

component of a more extensive system (von Bertalanffy, 1968).

As business leaders continue to welcome technological innovations, organizations

must endorse these new technological advancements, and organizational parts must work

as one (Han et al., 2023). To realize this objective, IT leaders must implement strategies

to meet organizational goals and protect corporate data from cyberattacks (Han et al.,

2023). A systemic approach to data security management is centered on impending the

systems is an integrated data security system characterized by the accomplishment of a

stable state through the involvement of all the system components (Y. Connolly & Wall,

2019). Any interruption in the organizational data system might threaten the

organization’s future. IT leaders should consider this to guarantee the system’s or

organization’s survival (Mierzwiak et al., 2019). Thus, systems theory provides a

substantial baseline for efficiently managing cybersecurity (Zenker & Kock, 2020).

Exploring the effective strategies used by IT leaders to prevent cyberattacks could serve

as best practices, boost customer confidence, and stimulate economic growth (Dias et al.,

2022).

Systems theory is suitable for this study because the idea is a holistic approach

that views a complete information security system as contrary to viewing the parts as

distinct entities (Chatterjee, 2021). Understanding a whole system decreases the

complexity of comprehending multiple parts of a system (Yun et al., 2019). Integrating

systems theory in this study assisted in exploring strategies to influence the system’s

interconnections, feedback, and different performances. Recognizing interconnections

and input in a system will contribute to getting a better understanding of the system

structure and allow me to identify the organizational strength and weaknesses in

designing and implementing these strategies (Zhu, 2022). Further, system theory is

suitable for this study because it could facilitate a proper understanding of the effective

strategies IT university leaders could use to prevent or mitigate emerging cyberattacks.

Supporting and Contrasting Theories

Following the nature of this study, systems theory was selected as the conceptual

framework to aid in comprehending the phenomena and explore the strategies university

IT leaders apply to prevent or mitigate emerging cyberattacks. This section presents

theories that support or contrast systems theory as the selected theory for this study.

There are several theories that a researcher can choose for the study. However, the

researcher must determine which theory will best address the problem statement and

answer the research question before selecting it. There are a series of cybersecurity

theories, such as the theory of information warfare and the theory of protection

motivation (Dias et al., 2022).

Theory of Information Warfare

The information warfare theory is newly developed compared to systems theory.

The origin of the information warfare theory is associated with Sun Tzn, following

massive improvements in communication and technology (Werder & Maedche, 2018).

The enormous progress in communication and technology generated strategic

consequences that impacted the government, the military, and the general public (Monov

& Karev, 2018). Information warfare is about gathering, providing, and denying

information to improve decision-making while damaging the enemy (Monov & Karev,

2018). Today, information warfare is given different names representing several

dimensions with other purposes. In modern technologies, the information warfare theory

consists of modern means of messaging, indicating a certain level of restricted war

carrying a low level of escalation while offering chances for geopolitical improvement

goals at a slight cost (Libicki, 2020). Information warfare is a transnational threat, mainly

affecting national security, penetrating national borders, and weakening stability (Libicki,

2020). The theory of information warfare is more about encouragement to leaders, the

general public, and control over actions and decision-making (Monov & Karev, 2018).

Therefore, the information warfare theory is more applicable when national security

circumstances affect the government and the defense force and was not suitable for this

study.

High-Reliability Theory

Another theory that supports system theory is the high-reliability theory developed

in 1987 to comprehend why reliable businesses are hierarchically low in errors or failures

(Scott et al., 2023). One prominent feature of highly reliable organizations is their

determination not to be content with the status quo of their current level of safety (Scott et

al., 2023).), unlike systems theory, which inspires scholars to consider organizations and

their environment as one entity rather than as individual entities. According to R. M. Rice

(2021), the highly reliable theory involves studying organizations capable of evading

errors while providing adequate competencies under an extensive environmental

situation. The systems theory and highly reliable theory consist of complex systems and

how the environment affects the system’s general performance. However, according to

Scott et al. (2023), high-reliability theory focuses more on nuclear plants and air travel

organizations that manage operations with disastrous consequences, while systems

theory, on the other hand, applies to several organizations such as universities.

Grey System Theory

Grey systems theory is another theory that I considered but was not selected

because it did not satisfy the need of this study. Researchers could employ grey systems

theory in contrast to systems theory. Grey systems theory was developed in 1982 by

Julong Deng to bridge the gap between natural and social sciences (Deng, 1982).

According to Hofkirchner (2019), grey systems theory is said to have knowns and

unknowns. Hence any business problem is studied with a small sample or incorrect data

leading to wrong assumptions or luring conclusions based on limited information. In

contrast to grey system theory, systems theory will aid the researcher in recognizing the

problem, creating patterns, and establishing relationships (Dailey et al., 2023). All the

elements associated with this study’s business problem are identified, so systems theory

is selected as the conceptual framework to guide this study.

Finally, systems theory is chosen as the conceptual framework to ground this

study because I can apply it to universities as it satisfies the conditions of being classified

as an open system. Systems theory encourages a holistic approach when investigating a

business problem which will guide the researcher in this study to explore the strategies

that IT leaders use to prevent or mitigate emerging cyberattacks in universities.

Furthermore, applying systems theory in this study, universities can be viewed as a

purposeful system with interconnected subsystems working harmoniously to accomplish

a mutual goal. The remainder of this section will cover the main themes discovered

during the literature review for this study.

Concept of Cybersecurity

Internet usage increased significantly during this pandemic, with sizable

interconnected networks facing multiple threats (Barik et al., 2022). As a result, there

are numerous security threats in cyberspace. According to Barik et al. (2022),

cyberattacks are increasing rapidly due to advanced digital technologies used by hackers,

and cybercriminals are conducting cyberattacks, making cyber security a rapidly growing

field. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) defines cybersecurity

as the process of protecting information by preventing, detecting, and responding to

attacks (Arpaci & Sevinc, 2022). User and organization assets comprise connected

services, applications, devices, systems, and stored or transmitted data in cyberspace

(Coenraad et al., 2020).

Security leaders or professionals aim to ensure business continuity by preventing

and mitigating the impact of security incidents that threaten organization information

assets and protecting information and its critical elements, including systems and

hardware that store and transmit (Tsaregorodtsev et al., 2019). The organization’s three

primary cybersecurity goals are known as CIA-triad: confidentiality, integrity, and

availability (see figure 2). The CIA triad guides IT leaders to understand and address

related security problems (Tsaregorodtsev et al., 2019). Confidentiality is the ability to

protect information from unauthorized disclosure; Integrity is the ability to ensure the

accuracy and competence of information, and availability is the ability to ensure that

information is readily accessible to authorized users when needed (Miloslavskaya et al.,

2018).

Figure 2

The CIA Triad

Note. The CIA triad. Adapted from “Biometric system for protecting information and

improving service delivery: The case of a developing country’s social security and

pension organization” by Owusu-Oware and Effah, 2022, Information Development,

0(0), p. 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669221085709

Cybersecurity, from a theoretical perspective, comprises technical controls and

leadership. Apart from technology, the fundamental direction of the cybersecurity

approach involves governance and management as primary aspect of security

(Tsaregorodtsev et al., 2019). According to Whitman and Mattord (2022), the

fundamental element of cybersecurity is to ensure the CIA (confidentiality, integrity, and

availability) of information, referred to as the CIA security model (Whitman & Mattord,

2022). Whitson advocated that organizations attain security through risk analysis, security

policies, security training, and awareness, as well as developing a plan for disaster

avoidance and recovery (Whitman & Mattord, 2022). Despite the CIA security model’s

appearance and other security standards and frameworks, there is no common ground for

deploying a standard approach to cybersecurity management. Organizations are trapped

by the scientific CIA opinion on one hand and by the actual incorporation within

corporate governance. Security policy, compliance, and awareness are the three

cornerstones of capable cybersecurity architecture (Xiong & Lagerström, 2019).

Security Policy

Security policy is a cornerstone for capable cybersecurity architecture, yet it has

shortcomings, such as developing a good understanding of security policy and

implementing it (Lena et al., 2019). Security policies are noted in the literature as a

primary control organization can implement to protect their data (Shields et al., 2020).

Besides the investment in information security technologies, such as antivirus, firewalls,

backup systems, and cybersecurity awareness, training and education programs are

essential for organizations to implement security policies (Shields et al., 2020).

According to Peterson et al. (2022), security policy is a set of laws, rules, and practices

regulating how an organization protects and distributes resources to achieve specific

security objectives.

The security policy determines the organizational direction and users’ practical

actions (Shields et al., 2020). The main objective of security policy is to assess

information resource users’ rights and responsibilities (Peterson et al., 2022). Security

policy is an organization’s baseline for implementing cybersecurity (Klier et al., 2022).

According to Klier et al. (2022), a positive correlation exists between effective security

policy and cybersecurity implementation. According to Peterson et al. (2022), security

policy is the primary enabler of processes within the organization and the continuous

operation of information systems. The literature strongly advocates for the importance of

security policy; inadequate or insufficient implementation can weaken the information

security process and render information security useless (Peterson et al., 2022)

Security Compliance

Engaging in security awareness activities helps foster a culture of compliance

toward information security in the organization. Security incidents such as the Sony

Pictures breach 2014 indicate that confidential information is at risk (Pacella, 2016).

According to Yun et al. (2019). researchers consider human behaviors in technology to

enhance information security compliance. Lee and Hong (2020) supported this view in

their study on physicians’ diligence in protecting confidential patient information. They

found that physicians would put data at risk if protecting them impedes their job functions

despite the growing importance of information security (Lee & Hong, 2020).They further

found that those with access to confidential information are not driven to protect them

correctly when they believe more critical work needs to be done. Lee and Hong (2020)

provided a motive to consider user behavior to secure confidential data through

information security compliance. Reeves et al. (2021) supported Bicaku et al. (2020)

motive and further recommended a better understanding of individual behavior in

securing confidential information. Lee and Hong (2020) findings are significant because

Lee and Hong (2020) assume that the user’s practice diligently complies with information

security policies; however, these assumptions of compliance may be incorrect, and

Scholars and practitioners should not accept that security policies are consistently

followed (Reeves et al., 2021).

Bicaku et al. (2020) used the protection motivation theory to develop a fear appeal

rhetorical framework to judge information security policies’ effectiveness when

individual employees are affected through personal relevance. The study found that

particular significance substantially positively influences compliance using the model.

Bicaku et al. (2020) surveyed the Finnish city government as the population, limiting the

ability to globalize the study results. Bicaku et al. (2020) study provides insight into

human behavior concerning personal relevance influencing compliance with information

security policies.

Other studies have also observed compliance performance and information

security. Fawehinmi et al. (2020) attempted to determine the human behavioral factors

that lead to using and complying with information security systems. The authors extended

the technology acceptance model (TAM), which looks at technology’s perceived ease of

use and usefulness (Mlekus et al., 2020). Mlekus et al. added social impact, perceived

cost, technology utility, individual innovation, and computer selfefficacy to TAM. The

authors found that social influence factors positively affect an individual’s intent to use

information security mechanisms. The study had significant results, but the population

was limited to China. Cultural differences may impact compliance because the research

relates to human behavior (Mlekus et al., 2020)

The literature views cybersecurity compliance through expected avenues. Kour et

al. (2020) conducted an action research study on user training effectiveness to improve

information security policy compliance. Kour et al. (2020) developed a training program

based on the universal constructive instructional theory and the elaboration likelihood

model. Kour et al. (2020) research aimed to test the effectiveness of user training

developed using theory-driven methods. Empirical research in developing information

security training is a constructive step in the field; however, the findings suggested that

social influences are a large part of motivating compliance behavior. Fawehinmi et al.

(2020) included understanding the social consequences of compliance behavior. Training

may positively affect compliance behavior, but it is not the only factor. To enhance

security compliance, the organization must create a compliance culture (Fawehinmi et al.,

2020). The culture of compliance is achieved by implementing an effective cybersecurity

program that deals with all organizational levels, conveys information security, and

promotes cybersecurity awareness (Bicaku et al., 2020).

Cybersecurity Awareness

Security awareness is an initiative activity in an organization that aims to ensure

that both management and the end-users are aware and dedicated to security, risk

reduction, security policies, and standards (Rahim et al., 2019). Cybersecurity awareness

is essential because information security techniques concerning the information system

can be misused or poorly implemented, thereby making security guidelines ineffective

(Xiong & Lagerström, 2019). The effectiveness of security awareness relies on the

willingness of individuals to receive it. Awareness activities cannot be productive without

a genuine interest in information security (Whyte, 2022).

Although security awareness is a crucial function in the organization, security

awareness is underfunded and implemented in an ad hoc process. Security awareness is

unstructured in many organizations (Back & Guerette, 2021). To promote security

awareness, organizations must create a security culture by implementing security

techniques that aim at all levels: employees, top management, and end-users (Back &

Guerette, 2021). Prior studies have considered cybersecurity security awareness an

essential enhancement factor for cyberattack prevention control. Surveys show that

despite the significant role of security awareness in cybersecurity management, less than

30% of organizations have security awareness schemes (Aydin, 2021). Little attention is

given to security awareness, and most awareness activities are neglected in organizations

despite the direct relationship between security awareness and compliance (Rahim et al.,

2019).

The ability to connect securely to virtual networks is the case within universities.

Students are increasingly learning in digital formats; faculty, staff, and visitors

continually access and share information online, and more infrastructure and facility

functions are managed online (Soomro et al., 2020). To maintain a collaborative culture,

universities must effectively secure the network, physical, cloud environment, and

Internet of Things (Soomro et al., 2020). There are four significant types of cybersecurity:

network security, physical security, cloud security, and Internet of Things

(IoT) security.

Network Security

Network security is critical to the day-to-day IT operations of nearly every

organization. Network security protects organizational data from unauthorized entry

through the computer network (Tao et al., 2020). Network security consists of software,

hardware, and technology working harmoniously to protect corporate data from several

threats. According to ThiBac and Minh (2022), network security serves as a wall between

the network and malicious activities, and organizations such as universities must protect

the network to ensure the continuous delivery of services to meet the demands of

stakeholders (Bada & Nurse, 2019). Examples of network security include a firewall that

acts like a barricade between an internal trusted network and external Internet, email

security that helps to stop any incoming attack, preventing loss of sensitive data, and an

antivirus that allows scanning Malware upon entry (J. Sun, 2022).

Physical Security

A key component of cybersecurity is physical security, as loss of hardware,

espionage, and data theft can occur due to physical security breaches (Chandna & Tiwari,

2023). There will be a great deal of variation between universities concerning the level of

physical security due to location and climate. However, we did find some generic

discussions about campus physical vulnerabilities: Universities generally practice very

little physical security due to their open and inclusive academic culture. Cameroon

University campuses lack physical security as there are no physical access controls. If

they do, Tao et al. (2020) reported, it is impossible to enforce access control or determine

who is responsible for a security incident. Typical university incidents include theft, loss,

and damage to portable/stationary devices. In all these cases, a weak physical access

control system and security for physical equipment contribute to the threat event (Tao et

al., 2020).

Cloud Security

According to Mthunzi et al. (2020), many organizations, including universities,

face the risk of cloud security. To better store and share information, many universities

have adopted cloud computing to create a virtual repository for data storage and an

invisible channel through which information is shared (Vinoth et al., 2022). Cloud

computing makes collaboration easy in the learning environment. However, cloud

computing puts universities at risk for cyberattacks, especially when PII, operational data,

financial aid data, and other sensitive information are stored on third-party servers

accessible over the Internet (Khoda Parast et al., 2022). Cloud security refers to a broad

set of policies, technologies, and controls deployed to protect data, applications, and

cloud computing’s associated infrastructure (Alraja et al., 2023). Cloud security primarily

emphasizes the vulnerabilities of Internet services and shared environments (Mohammad

& Pradhan, 2021). It protects the application and Infrastructure security from

cloudconnected components. Universities are recommended to implement and perform a

routine revision of their cloud computing policies to protect data (Lopez Garcia et al.,

2020)

IoT Security

Another aspect of cybersecurity is the Internet of Things. This is a network of all

physical devices connected to the Internet, such as appliances in the home (Mthunzi et al.,

2020). There are many benefits to using the Internet of Things, but the organization also

faces several risks (Ravikumar et al., 2022). For example, a hacker could access

organizational IoT devices and compromise sensitive data, including financial records

(Kaur et al., 2023)). Organizations must take the necessary steps to secure IoT devices to

protect themselves against these risks. A few strategies to consider are using strong

passwords, updating devices regularly, and installing apps from trusted sources (Kaur et

al., 2023). In social media channels over the Internet, cybercriminals can exploit internal

information or employee contacts to perform phishing attacks and identity theft (Aydos et

al., 2019).

Social Media and Cybersecurity Risks on Universities

Generally, a social network is a group of individuals or organizations with at least

one connection (Whyte, 2022). Businesses use social media to boost brand recognition

and connect with consumers. Social media use has become so popular that companies are

unaware of the numerous cyber risks that they pose (Ali & Mohd Zaharon, 2024).

According to Ali and Mohd Zaharon (2024), more than 59% of the global population uses

social media platforms at least once daily, or almost 4.8 billion people. People and

businesses are increasingly exposed to cyber threats due to social media platforms, which

help users keep in touch with friends, connect with customers, and promote businesses

(Whyte, 2022). A business’s risk of social engineering attacks increases when using

social networks, even though social media is an indispensable marketing tool for modern

companies (Neumann & Rhodes, 2023). Cybercriminals can exploit social media

channels to perform phishing attacks, credential thefts, data thefts, and other scams by

posting internal information or employee contacts (Neumann & Rhodes, 2023).

Regarding social media usage, university students, such as Facebook, Twitter,

Snapchat, and YouTube, are the most active users as reported by Neumann and Rhodes

(2023). As a result, Malware and other viruses, such as wildfire, will be hosted and

spread through this mechanism by using social media sites (White & Forrester-Jones,

2020). There is no way to block access to social media permanently in a university

setting. Identifying infected devices as soon as possible is essential, and the cyber team

should maintain data and network security.

The demands for cybersecurity in universities will continue to increase. Serious

data breaches have occurred already and are likely to happen again without effective

strategies implementation (Greyson et al., 2023). Universities and other academic

institutions have become lucrative targets for cyberattacks and have suffered multiple

high-impact incidents (Adebayo & Ninggal, 2022). University institutions manage large

amounts of valuable research and sensitive personal data, which makes them an attractive

target for cyber-criminals, espionage, and hacktivists (Adebayo & Ninggal, 2022). The

threat landscape consists of everything from opportunists seeking financial gain to

heavily funded state-sponsored actors who intend to steal trade secrets (Primack et al.,

2019).

Furthermore, the free flow of the workforce and annual rotations of new students,

guest, and employees also adds to the universities’ information security challenges

(Primack et al., 2019). Even though academic institutions face substantial cyber risk at

their institutions, the initiative to implement cybersecurity measures varies, and the cost

of recovering from a cyberattack on universities is similar to that of other organizations

(White & Forrester-Jones, 2020). Cyberattack plight is not without severe consequences;

students’ data can be compromised, research information exposed, and even government

data can be stolen. Furthermore, universities can close down for days due to attacks such

as Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) and ransomware attacks (Primack et al., 2019).

Long-term reputational damage can have a profound impact on enrollment levels. A

fundamental characteristic of the academic community is that it is a place to share

knowledge. However, there are some critical vulnerabilities when ensuring security

(Whyte, 2022).

Consequently, almost three-quarters of the attacks launched against colleges and

universities have been successful. The number of successful attacks in the business sector

was 68% compared to 75% in the educational sector (Leal & Musgrave, 2023). It has

become increasingly clear that university students and staff are at risk of various threats

(Arpaci & Sevinc, 2022). The educational industry faces similar vulnerability as other

organizations but is often deeper in the academic sector. The security managers within the

institutions are responsible for protecting, securing, and storing institutional information.

This information includes financial aid administration containing student and family

personally identifiable information (PII), research information, intellectual properties,

online learning portals, and other operational data within the institution (Arpaci & Sevinc,

2022). This information puts the institution at high risk for the cyber threat that aims at

obtaining sensitive information. According to Leal and Musgrave (2023), organizational

leaders such as university administrators and managers are recommended to work closely

with the cybersecurity team to prevent, protect, mitigate, respond to, and recover from

cyber threats. The most commonly used cyberattack methods on university systems are

Phishing, Denial of Service (DOS), Malware, and

Ransom.

Phishing

In cybersecurity, studies show that phishing is the most common threat affecting

everyday internet users. The phishing attack attempts to gain sensitive information

effectuated through email by malicious individuals or groups (Lee & Hong, 2020).

Phishing victims are usually targeted through fraudulent emails that hyperlink to fake

websites through which users are urged to release sensitive information like home

addresses, usernames, and passwords (Tornblad et al., 2021). Criminals use so-called

social engineers to trick users, infecting computers with viruses, stealing their money

from cards or their identity, taking their data, and even some digital documents related to

studies or research (Verma & Shri, 2022). In recent years, phishing attacks have become

an increasingly prevalent problem in universities. As a result, Cameroon universities are

exposed to much risk, even more than institutions in other parts of the world. To mitigate

the risk of phishing attacks, universities should employ cybersecurity training to enhance

individual preparedness.

Denial-of-service (DOS)

One of the most common types of cyberattacks is a denial-of-service attack, also

known as a DDoS attack (Zhao et al., 2023). Universities face several dangerous cyber

threats. As a result of a successful DOS attack, there can be significant financial

implications. It has been reported in security surveys that DDOS attacks are estimated to

cost between $ 20,000 and $ 40,000 per hour on average in the case of a DDOS attack

(Aydos et al., 2019). The Denial-of-Service attack is a cyberattack that affects one

computer or several computers connected simultaneously and affects the ability of

legitimate users to access resources by reducing, restricting, or preventing access to those

resources, such as email, learning accounts, and websites (Zhao et al., 2023). In a DDOS

attack, an attacker will create a flood of traffic or service demands on the victim’s system

to overwhelm the system (Bu et al., 2023). University cybersecurity departments should

deploy antivirus software, firewalls, and policies to mitigate denial-of-service attacks.

Malware

Malware is another type of attack vector for universities. This attack occurs when

unauthorized or unrequested software is installed on individual computers or institutional

servers, limiting access or courses the system to crash (Verma & Shri, 2022)). Feng and

Wang (2019) state that Malware may include ransomware, viruses, worms, and adware.

Malware threats often steal information to commit fraud. Universities are hosts of

bringyour-own-everything (BYOE) environments, and at such, students, faculty, staff,

and visitors bring everything, such as smartphones, tablets, laptops, desktops, and other

navigation devices, to meet educational and social needs (Chigada & Daniels, 2021).

BYOE enhances information sharing, digital learning, and how individuals can access

university networks. Some BYOE devices are unsecured, rendering university networks

and systems vulnerable to attacks (Chigada & Daniels, 2021). Monitoring and routine risk

assessment are recommended as university cybersecurity management efforts.

Ransom Attacks

An attack known as ransomware is malicious software designed to encrypt a

system to prevent its operation until the money is paid (Niki et al., 2022). Even though

ransom attacks usually target individuals, it’s only a matter of time before groups become

victims (J. Davis & Wilner, 2022). This is standard practice at Cameroon University. This

attack mainly targets the devices of all those who connect to their networks, students,

staff, and visitors (J. Davis & Wilner, 2022). A lock screen is typical in all encryption

programs, screen lockers, and other types of digital currency. These screens encourage

victims to buy cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, to pay ransom (Cojocariu et al., 2020).

The decryption key is given to the victim once the ransom has been paid, and the victim

may then attempt to decrypt the file decrypt files (Cojocariu et al., 2020). However,

multiple sources report varying success rates with decryption, so it is not a guaranteed

process. Sometimes, the victim never receives the keys after paying the ransom, and

malicious software is installed on a computer during an attack (Cojocariu et al., 2020).

Often, ransomware victims who pay the ransom get their information retrieved by future

attacks until the victim pays another ransom (Y. Connolly & Wall, 2019). In recent years,

there has been a significant increase in cyberattacks of this type in universities.

According to Datta and Acton (2022), cyberattacks become less likely to occur as

cybersecurity processes become more automated by reducing the time needed to detect

and respond to threats and improving detection accuracy.

Emerging Trends in Cybersecurity

Companies across many industries are being victimized by cybercrime every day.

As a result, it has emerged as one of the greatest threats facing companies today

(Trumbach et al., 2023). According to Arpaci and Sevinc (2022), cyberattacks have

increased in recent years, with the number of attacks increasing rapidly worldwide and

business costs growing. Cybercriminals are becoming more sophisticated and innovative

each year, and the threat will only grow as they become more sophisticated and

intelligent. (Arpaci & Sevinc, 2022). Data breaches can be prevented by using traditional

security methods, but these methods are not adequate in the case of cyberattacks.

Cybercriminals have developed new hacking techniques and robust tools to exploit,

attack, and breach data (Trumbach et al., 2023). Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies

are introduced to cyberspace to create intelligent models that protect systems from attack

(Chandna & Tiwari, 2023). Rapid technological development has led to artificial

intelligence’s development in cyber security through its ability to analyze data and make

decisions (Chandna & Tiwari, 2023).

According to Bada and Nurse (2019), universities are facing a massive

cyberattack surface, which continues to grow alarmingly. An organization’s cybersecurity

posture requires more than just human intervention to be analyzed and improved (Carlton

et al., 2019). Artificial intelligence and machine learning to detect cyber threats have

become increasingly crucial to cybersecurity because they can quickly analyze millions of

data sets and track down a wide range of threats — from malware threats to shady

behavior that could lead to phishing attacks (Chandna & Tiwari, 2023). This technology

continuously learns and improves based on experience and current data, thus identifying

new attacks that may occur in the future (Chandna & Tiwari, 2023). There are many ways

in which artificial intelligence can be used to improve cybersecurity. As cybercrime

trends evolve, artificial intelligence and machine learning can improve the ability to

detect threats, respond more effectively, and keep up with cyber criminals (Dasgupta et

al., 2022).

The Identification of New Threats

Artificial intelligence can be used to detect cyber threats, as well as potentially

malicious activities on the Internet (Slepian & Jacoby-Senghor, 2021). The sheer volume

of new Malware generated every week is challenging for traditional software systems to

keep up with, so this is an area where Artificial Intelligence can make a difference

(Dasgupta et al., 2022). The AI system is trained by sophisticated algorithms, running

pattern recognition and identifying even the minutest behaviors of malware or

ransomware attacks before it infects the system, so they can be detected before it gets into

the system (Dasgupta et al., 2022). In addition to predicting cyber threats, artificial

intelligence allows natural language processing to curate data due to scraping articles,

news, and studies on cyber security (Dasgupta et al., 2022). The results of this analysis

identify new anomalies, cyberattacks, and preventive strategies. A cybersecurity system

based on artificial intelligence can provide an in-depth understanding of global and

industry-specific threats, which can help you make essential decisions based on what is

most likely to be used against organization systems, not just what could be used to attack

organization systems (Dasgupta et al., 2022).

Defending Against Internet Bots

Internet traffic today is dominated by robots, which can pose a threat. Internet bots

or robots can be dangerous for various reasons, from account takeovers using stolen

credentials to bogus account creations and data theft (Dasgupta et al., 2022). Manual

responses alone will not be able to counter automated threats. Universities can use the

integration of artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence technologies to optimize

website traffic and distinguish between good bots, such as search engine crawlers, and

bad bots, like humans (Mohammad & Pradhan, 2021). The deployment of artificial

intelligence allows cyber teams to analyze massive amounts of data and adapt

cybersecurity strategies to a rapidly changing environment (Kenny et al., 2022).

Breach Risk Prediction

Organizations using artificial intelligence can create an accurate and detailed

inventory of all of their IT assets that give them a comprehensive analysis of all devices,

users, and applications allowed access to particular systems at various levels based on

their permissions (Kenny et al., 2022). As a result of a coordinated analysis of asset

inventory and threat exposure, AI-based methods can forecast how and where a business

will most likely be compromised to plan appropriately and allocate resources to areas

most likely compromised (Mohammad & Pradhan, 2021). The insights gained from

AIbased analysis enable the organization to improve cyber resilience by modifying

cybersecurity controls and processes (Mohammad & Pradhan, 2021).

Better Endpoint Protection

An increasing number of devices are used to work remotely, and artificial

intelligence is essential in securing all these devices (Dasgupta et al., 2022). Antivirus

solutions and VPNs can protect organizations from remote malware and ransomware

attacks. However, these services tend to work by relying on signatures. It is, therefore,

essential to stay up-to-date with signature definitions to stay protected from the latest

threats (Dasgupta et al., 2022). When virus definitions lag due to insufficient updates or a

lack of awareness from software retailers, this can lead to a security concern. For this

reason, a signature protection system may be unable to protect against a new malware

attack (Dasgupta et al., 2022).

In contrast to the traditional method, AI-driven endpoint protection adopts a

different approach, which involves establishing a baseline of behavior for the endpoint

through repeated training to prevent future attacks (Kenny et al., 2022). The AI can flag

unusual events and take appropriate action such as sending a notification to a technician

or returning the system to a safe state after a ransomware attack (Kenny et al., 2022). The

advantage of this is that it provides proactive protection against threats rather than waiting

for updates to existing signatures.

Cybersecurity experts can use artificial intelligence (AI) to strengthen

cybersecurity best practices and lessen the attack surface instead of constantly on the

lookout for malicious activity that might occur (Mohammad & Pradhan, 2021). As IT

security teams strive to improve their efficiency with AI, it is becoming a must-have

technology, according to Mohammad and Pradhan (2021). A human being cannot

adequately secure an enterprise-level attack surface, and artificial intelligence provides

the analysis and threat identification that security professionals need to minimize breach

risk and enhance security posture (J. Sun, 2022). Furthermore, AI can lead to the

discovery and prioritization of risks, effective event response, and early detection of

malware threats (J. Sun, 2022). Despite AI’s potential downsides, artificial intelligence

contributes to advancing cybersecurity and assists organizations in strengthening their

security posture (Kenny et al., 2022).

Effects of Cyberattacks on Universities

Cyberattacks continue to increase across the globe, and educational institutions

aren’t immune to the dangers of cyberattacks, which are on the rise (Prasad & Chandra,

2023). Cyberattacks have become one of the most prevalent university threats in recent

decades, with devastating consequences. In today’s digital world, university store

increasingly personally identifiable information (PII) about students, teachers, and staff.

Universities are among the prime targets for cyberattacks because they keep a lot of PII

about students, including student grades, financial aid, social security numbers, medical

records, and research data. In the face of cyberattacks, universities can face severe and

sometimes even life-threatening consequences, some of which may extend beyond the

immediate effects.

Effects on Learning

In the wake of a cyberattack, universities can be forced to shut down, disrupting

classes, obstructing students’ access to education, and ultimately hindering academic

performance (Shaikh & Siponen, 2023). University closures can have much more severe

consequences in districts where students depend on free lunch programs for a portion of

their meals than just lower grades in the classroom (Prasad & Chandra, 2023).

Effect on University Reputation

As a result of cyberattacks, trust between students, families, teachers, and

administrators can be compromised (Shaikh & Siponen, 2023). There is a high

probability that an attack will draw negative media attention to the university, even if that

attack is not intentional, which can be challenging to recover from for a university

(Soomro et al., 2020). In addition to the damage to a university’s reputation, such an

incident can result in difficulty in attracting and retaining staff and students due to the

damage caused.

Effect of Compromised Information

The consequences may be severe if an attacker can access sensitive information

through a cyberattack. As long as attackers have access to personal information, they can

commit crimes such as identity theft which can have long-term consequences for the

victim’s credit history (Soomro et al., 2020). Cyberattacks against universities can result

in unauthorized charges and funds being stolen from the district due to financial fraud

(Shaikh & Siponen, 2023). Unfortunately, cyberbullying can also occur due to these

security breaches because obtaining personal or medical information can lead to the

intimidation or harassment of individuals (Shaikh & Siponen, 2023).

IT Strategies for Preventing and Mitigating Cyberattack Cost

Technology advancements and a dynamic environment create a complex

landscape with the advent of Web 2.0 and its associated territory. Coping with

cybersecurity-related challenges has become increasingly challenging (Cathcart, 2019). A

study by Mansfield-Devine (2018) confirms that digital security threats are becoming

more intense and complex daily. As the threat landscape evolves, more dynamic

measures are required to curb cyberattack incidents (Feng & Wang, 2019). Over the past

few years, a rise in cyberattacks has seen compensated investments to mitigate this threat.

According to Kaur et al. (2023), a Gartner survey conducted in 2015 estimated $7.1

billion in information security expenses in 2014. In 2015, cybersecurity investments

totaled $76.9 billion, confirming the trend (Kaur et al., 2023). Protecting sensitive

information is becoming increasingly crucial for businesses.

Furthermore, Home Depot responded to the Target data breach by investing a

massive amount of money in reforming security infrastructure to upgrade cash flow with

the ability to accept chip-enabled cards at the register (Marcus, 2018). Despite this,

increasing security investments does not equate to a corresponding increase in Incredibly

robust security infrastructure in today’s complex and evolving security environment.

Organizations such as universities must adopt effective data security measures strategies

to complement huge investments that are being made to mitigate or prevent data security

threats (Marcus, 2018). According to He et al. (2020), when identifying cybersecurity

strategies, demonstrating proactiveness, providing clear direction, establishing business

objectives, business alignment, and intelligent decision-making are some of the tenets of

effective cybersecurity strategies.

An intelligent computing approach based on group intelligence to secure the

information of virtual users provides an additional layer of protection for systems that are

not fully secure (Tan & Yu, 2018). As Tan and Yu (2018) reported, the algorithmic

model is designed to collect the historical data of a visitor’s access to private information.

This way, the threshold settings can be augmented to protect the user’s data adequately.

Filters for email messages is a vital strategy to prevent phishing attack. To start

addressing this issue, universities should set up email filters that automatically forward

suspicious emails from non-universities to users’ spam folders as a first, simple step

(Banerjee et al., 2022). Even though this is not a foolproof method of fixing the problem,

it is still an essential first step toward preventing malicious emails from reaching their

intended recipients.

Employee security training is one of the most effective ways to prevent

cyberattacks. Educating employees about security threats will help them identify and

respond effectively (Banerjee et al., 2022). A simple way to avoid a data breach due to

human error is to make employees aware of common attacks, such as phishing emails

(Islam et al., 2018). University training programs should teach end users what phishing is

and how to recognize it, and must commit the time and resources necessary to provide

faculty and staff members with the education they need to be successful (Banerjee et al.,

2022). According to He et al. (2020), users should be exposed to various phishing attacks

during this training. In addition to providing examples of actual attacks, creating a

repository that combines all such attacks, as Princeton University has done with its "Phish

Bowl," can be beneficial (He et al., 2020).

Installing a firewall and threat detection software is another strategy for

universities to prevent cyberattacks (Wu et al., 2022). Firewalls and other threat detection

systems that monitor organizational network traffic, such as endpoint detection and

remediation (EDR) solutions, can identify abnormal activity within the network (Wu et

al., 2022). As a firewall, it is one of the most effective methods of creating a barrier

between untrusted external networks and secured internal devices (Bakhsh et al., 2019).

Threat detection software and other EDR solutions detect and eradicate possible Malware

(Bakhsh et al., 2019).

Universities could prevent cyberattacks by installing updates and security patches

regularly. It is crucial to close security gaps as soon as possible to prevent cybercriminals

from exploiting weaknesses in unpatched or outdated software (Wu et al., 2022). Besides,

an effective patch management schedule will mitigate the cyber risk associated with the

university information systems by identifying vulnerabilities within the network, glancing

for patches available, and systematically installing those patches on all relevant assets

within the network (Bakhsh et al., 2019).

In today’s world, people cannot manage the increasing attack surface and process

the high capacity of vulnerabilities evolving daily without support (Dasgupta et al.,

2022). Several cyber security automation tools are available for universities to implement

to automate cyber risk prevention processes. These tools, such as cyber asset attack

surface management, risk-based vulnerability management, and cyber risk quantification,

are designed to allow security teams to work efficiently and at scale (Dasgupta et al.,

2022).

Assessing university cyber risks helps determine the impact of cyber threats

across its networks, devices, applications, and users (Ali & Mohd Zaharon, 2024).

Evaluating risk profiles can also serve as a valuable tool for identifying how adequate

existing security controls are and where coverage gaps may exist (Dasgupta et al., 2022).

There are several advantages to conducting a cyber risk assessment, including obtaining

an accurate overview of the university attack surface by identifying areas of vulnerability

that can be exploited (Ali & Mohd Zaharon, 2024). It also helps the university cyber team

determine which vulnerabilities need to be prioritized so that they can be resolved as

quickly as possible.

In summary, cyberattacks threaten universities, their customers, and the global

economy by infiltrating and stealing vital and confidential information for personal and

illegal benefit (He et al., 2020). Many themes in the present research emphasize

cyberattacks and security related to organizations. Shlomo et al. (2021) quoted financial

data losses in retail organizations such as Target, Neiman Marcus, and Michaels. Alraja et

al. (2023) deliberated the Sony network’s attacks to disrupt service and personal

information theft as another theme for data breaches. Cameroon University’s database

was hacked, and examination results were altered (Boraine & Doris, 2019). Managing

personal data has become an issue in universities because they hold rare data. There

continues to be significant data loss as breaches occur more often, affecting data security

and damaging network integrity and business reputation (Boraine & Doris, 2019)

The rise in cyberattacks that compromise private and organizational data shows no

signs of slowing down as university institutions’ increased development of technologies

and dependence on the Internet corresponds with the growth in cyberattacks (Rahim et

al., 2019). There is a gap in research about the lack of active cybersecurity measures and

security culture within university institutions (Rahim et al., 2019). This study obtained

evidence from systems theory to support effective strategies to prevent cyberattacks

within universities. Systems theory describes the principle that a system’s parts can best

be understood in the context of the relationships with each other and other systems rather

than in isolation (Adams et al., 2014; Bertalanffy, 1968). Using the system theory in this

study is expected to give me a means for developing an in-depth identification and

understanding of the participants’ strategies for mitigating the incidences and costs of

cyberattacks

University IT leaders are responsible for ensuring the safety of online services for

students, faculty, and staff. Universities are expected to safeguard their customers’ private

information by providing a secure and inaccessible database to unauthorized users. The

assumption remains that these systems are under siege, and reports of systems under

attack remain common within the university environment. To prevent cybercrime at

universities, university IT leaders must become aware of the risks associated with

cyberattacks directed at their institutions. The organization may be required to work with

students, faculty, staff, and visitors to promote safe Internet practices, provide encrypted

and secure transactions as a standard business practice, and, most importantly, protect the

institution’s integrity by ensuring consumer data is protected, unethical practices are

avoided, and reputation is protected (Rakas et al., 2020). Universities are doing their part

to combat these issues. Still, suppose we dig deeper into what effective strategies IT

leaders employ to protect our institutions from cyberattacks. In that case, we may provide

some solutions that would help protect the increasing number of academic institutions

that do not have a strategy or the capability to prevent cyberattacks.

Transition

Section 1 contained an introduction to the study regarding effective strategies

university information technology leaders use to prevent or mitigate cyberattacks’ costs.

Section 1 included the background of the study, the problem and purpose statement, the

nature of the study, the research question, interview questions, and the conceptual

framework. In addition, I included the assumptions, limitations, and delimitations, the

significance of the study, and the literature review for the study. Reviewing previous

research allowed me to discover what information exists concerning the survey.

Reviewing the academic and professional literature also allowed me to compare sample

sizes, research methods, and designs. Section 2 contained an overview of the purpose

statement, the role of the researcher and participants, and an explanation of the

methodology, research design, and data collection techniques that I used as the

researcher. Population and sampling, ethical research, data collection, data organization,

data analysis, and reliability and validity methods concluded Section 2. Section 3 includes

an introduction, presentation of findings, application to professional practice, implications

for social change, recommendations for action, further research, reflections, and

conclusion.

Section 2: The Project

In this study, I aimed to identify and explore the effective strategies that IT leaders

of universities in Cameroon use to prevent or mitigate the costs of cyberattacks.

Section 2 includes the (a) purpose statement, (b) role of the researcher, (c) participants,

(d) research method, (e) research design, (f) population and sampling, (g) ethical

research, (h) data collection instrument, (i) data collection technique, (j) data

organization, (k) data analysis, and (l) reliability and validity. The section ends with a

transition to Section 3.

Purpose Statement