Shared Responsibility

Translate shared responsibility into owners, cadence, and evidence outputs

Gridex offered this until 2026-07-25. The description it carried at the time was: “What a CMMC shared responsibility matrix should track across the contractor, MSP, MSSP, CSP, enclave provider, RPO, vCISO, and evidence coordinator.”

01

Implementation and evidence production can belong to different parties

02

Shared responsibilities need dependency and handoff fields

03

Every row needs an expected output and cadence

04

The contractor retains overall responsibility

Avoid a single RACI letter per control

One NIST requirement can contain several objectives and multiple operating tasks. A provider may configure a system while the contractor approves access, reviews results, and preserves the record. The matrix should be detailed enough to drive evidence requests.

Add evidence fields to the responsibility fields

The minimum useful row explains how the responsibility will be proven.

  • Applicable objective or responsibility statement
  • Implementer and process operator
  • Evidence producer and approved source
  • Expected artifact, record, interview owner, or test operator
  • Cadence and change trigger
  • Client reviewer, qualified reviewer, and escalation authority

Review the matrix when services change

The matrix should be reviewed at onboarding, renewal, scope change, provider change, and assessment preparation. A static matrix can become misleading when service descriptions or architectures change.

What the work produces

Concrete, client-owned operating records

Objective-level responsibility matrix
Evidence-output fields
Shared dependency map
Cadence and trigger fields
Review and escalation routing
Responsibility boundary

Facts, not verdicts

The matrix documents how work is allocated. It does not remove the contractor’s obligations or predetermine assessment findings.

Questions buyers ask

Frequently asked questions

Is a shared responsibility matrix required in one official format?

No single Gridex format is mandated. The important requirement is to document ESP relationships, services, scope, and responsibilities sufficiently for the program and assessment.

How often should it be reviewed?

At a minimum when providers, services, scope, systems, contracts, or relevant responsibilities change, and during scheduled program and assessment preparation reviews.

Primary references

Source context

Where Gridex is now

This is reference material, not an offer.

Gridex is a managed operations firm. Managed Voice Operations is the primary growth line and Managed Workflow Operations is the secondary line. There is no dashboard for anyone on the client side to run. The Voice Demo is in pilot as of 2026-08-11. Managed Voice is not yet operating for customers; demo calls are product tests, not customer production. No customer result or tested third-party integration is published. Managed Workflow Operations is the secondary line running today, and it is in validation.

Managed Voice Operations · Managed Workflow Operations

Explore current service lines →