This scenario represents ordinary negligence, making option A the correct answer. Ordinary negligence occurs when an individual fails to exercise the level of care, competence, or diligence that would reasonably be expected under similar circumstances. In the context of ISO/IEC 27001 certification audits, this includes failing to follow established audit procedures, best practices, or competence requirements, even if there is no intent to cause harm.
In the scenario, the audit team leader failed to follow established best practices and lacked sufficient expertise in certain complex ISMS areas. These shortcomings resulted in weak audit coverage and suboptimal outcomes. However, the audit was still conducted, findings were reported, and there is no indication of reckless disregard, willful misconduct, or intentional violation of duties. This distinction is important when assessing the severity of negligence.
Gross negligence would require evidence of a serious departure from accepted standards, such as knowingly ignoring mandatory audit requirements, deliberately conducting an audit without any competence, or showing reckless indifference to the consequences. That threshold is not met here. Similarly, option C is incorrect because the presence of procedural failures and competence gaps clearly indicates some level of negligence.
ISO 19011:2018 emphasizes auditor competence, due professional care, and adherence to audit principles.
Failure to meet these expectations constitutes negligence, but in this case, it remains within the bounds of ordinary negligence rather than gross negligence.