--- title: Factors affecting compliance score for citations description: Compliance scores for citations dynamically change based on changes to controls and control objectives. locale: en-US canonical_url: https://www.servicenow.com/docs/r/australia/governance-risk-compliance/policy-and-compliance-management/factors-affecting-compliance-score-for-citations.html release: australia product: Policy and Compliance Management classification: policy-and-compliance-management topic_type: concept last_updated: "2026-03-12" reading_time_minutes: 3 breadcrumb: [Association of citations to controls, Use, Policy and Compliance Management, Governance, Risk, and Compliance] --- # Factors affecting compliance score for citations Compliance scores for citations dynamically change based on changes to controls and control objectives. ## Property dependency - When the system property **Enable association of Citations to Controls Mapping** isturned off, compliance scores are calculated using the old formula: Average of child citations + Average of associated control objectives. - When the property is turned on, compliance scores use the new formula: \(Average of child citations + Average of directly linked controls\) ÷ 2. - After enabling the property: - Run the scheduled job **Calculate All Citations and Authority Documents Compliance Score** to recalculate scores. - Disable the periodic job Compliance Score V2 during recalculation to avoid conflicts. ## Manual actions When the system property is enabled, the following manual actions affect compliance score for citations: 1. Adding a control to a citation: Adding a control directly to a citation recalculates the citation’s compliance score using the new formula. Example: A citation currently has two controls, and both are compliant, so its compliance score is 100%. When you add a non-compliant control, the new score becomes the average of the two compliant controls and one non-compliant controls: \(100% + 100 + 0%\) ÷ 3 = 33%. 2. Removing a control from a citation: Removing a control triggers recalculation based on remaining controls. Example: A citation has three controls: two compliant and one non-compliant, giving it a compliance score of 66%. If you remove the non-compliant control, the score recalculates to 100% because only the two compliant controls remain. 3. Adding a citation to a control: Adding a citation to a control updates compliance scores for that citation. Example: A citation initially has no controls, so its compliance score is 0%. When you link a compliant control to it, the score updates to 100%. 4. Remove citation from a control: Removing a citation from a control recalculates compliance scores. Example: A citation has two controls, and both are compliant, resulting in a compliance score of 100%. If you remove one of the compliant controls, the score remains 100%, as the remaining control is still compliant, though fewer controls are associated. ## Changes to controls 1. Control creation due to adding entity or entity types to control objectives: When a new control is created for a control objective that is directly linked to a citation, it is automatically associated with all citations linked to that control objective. Example: Adding an entity to a control objective generates new controls. These controls are auto-linked to all citations associated with that control objective, updating their compliance scores. 2. Control deletion: When a control is deleted from a control objective that is associated to a citation, the compliance score of all the associated citations changes. Example: A citation is linked to one control objective that has two controls: one compliant and one non-compliant \(score = 50%\). Deleting the non-compliant control updates the score to 100%. 3. Control status: Changing a control’s status \(Compliant, Non-Compliant, Not Applicable\) recalculates compliance scores for all associated citations. Example: When a citation has only one control with compliant status, the compliance score is 100%. When the status changes to non-compliant, the new score is 0%. 4. Control weight change: If weighted average is enabled, changing a control’s weight impacts compliance score. Example: A compliant control with weight of 100 and a non-compliant control with weight 10 changes the compliance score. So compliance score = \(100 ÷ 110\) × 100 = 91%. 5. Control active flag change: Activating or deactivating a control recalculates compliance scores for associated citations. Example: Deactivating a compliant control reduces the citation’s score because fewer controls remain in calculation. ## Changes to citations 1. Citation deletion: When a citation is deleted, all the citation-to-control associations are deleted. No recalculation of compliance score for the citation itself, as it’s deleted. Authority document scores may update internally. 2. Citation associated to a control objective: When a citation is associated to a control objective, all the L1 controls from the control objective are added to the citation and the compliance score is recalculated. Example: Linking a citation to a new control objective adds its controls, changing the citation’s compliance score. 3. Citation disassociated from a control objective: When a citation is disassociated from a control objective, automatically added controls are deleted. The manual controls \(flagged as “outside hierarchy”\) are not deleted. The compliance score is recalculated. Example: Removing a control objective association deletes automatically-added controls but keeps manually added controls, updating the citation’s compliance score accordingly. ## Additional notes - Manual associations are flagged as Associated Manually = True and are never auto-deleted. - When controls go outside hierarchy due to disassociation, the system displays an info message listing those controls for user review. - All compliance breakdowns, dashboards, and widgets now source data from the M2M table instead of control objective hierarchy.