SIEM detects threats by correlating logs and telemetry.
SOAR automates playbooks for triage and containment.
Incident management governs everything that happens around those actions—people, decisions, communications, accountability, and recovery—when an incident escalates beyond the SOC.
All security leaders understand the difference between SIEM and SOAR. SIEM aggregates events from across the environment and applies correlation rules to surface threats. SOAR operationalizes response by executing automated workflows across the security stack. Both are foundational to modern security operations, and most mature teams rely on one or both.
Yet incidents still become disorganized.
That breakdown rarely happens because detection or automation failed. It happens because the response is treated as the whole problem, when it is only one phase of a much broader incident management lifecycle.
Why Incidents Break Down Outside the SOC
The most difficult moments in an incident are not purely technical. When ransomware spreads or identity systems are compromised, the SOC detects malicious activity and SOAR executes containment playbooks. At the same time, leaders must answer questions that sit well outside the SOC’s scope:
- Is the incident reportable under regulatory requirements?
- When should outside counsel or insurers be engaged?
- How should executives and the board be briefed?
- What messaging, if any, is approved for customers or partners?
Most security stacks provide no secure way to manage these decisions. Legal cannot safely access technical findings. PR lacks clarity on approved messaging. Executives want real-time updates but should not need SOC access. Teams fall back on personal phones and fragmented email threads, erasing any defensible audit trail.
Organizations that experience chaotic incidents are not missing tools.
They are missing incident management—the layer that governs response, communication, and recovery as a single, coordinated process.
What SIEM Contributes to Incident Management
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) centralizes logs from across the environment, correlates events, and surfaces activity that may indicate a threat. It ingests telemetry from endpoints, firewalls, cloud services, network devices, and applications, then applies correlation rules and threat intelligence to generate alerts.
Within incident management, SIEM plays a critical but limited role: detection and investigation.
Analysts use SIEM to search historical data, understand attacker behavior, trace lateral movement, and determine scope and impact. Log retention and reporting support audit and compliance needs.
Where SIEM’s Role Ends
When a critical alert fires, SIEM informs the SOC that something is wrong. It does not:
- Determine legal or regulatory obligations
- Coordinate decisions across IT, legal, PR, and executives
- Track approvals for high-impact actions
- Maintain a unified, defensible timeline of decisions and communications
SIEM also operates in-band, assuming corporate identity, email, and collaboration tools are trustworthy. When identity systems or email are compromised, SIEM may continue to alert—but the organization’s ability to manage the incident deteriorates rapidly.
SIEM supports incident management. It does not run it.
What SOAR Adds—and What It Doesn’t
Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) automates repeatable technical actions across the security stack. It consumes alerts—often from SIEM—and executes playbooks that enrich data, perform containment, and open tickets without requiring manual intervention for every step.
Within incident management, SOAR accelerates the response phase.
Playbooks handle scenarios such as phishing triage, malware containment, or suspicious login investigations. Human-in-the-loop controls pause automation when approvals are required. The result is faster containment and more consistent execution.
SOAR’s Management Gap
SOAR is designed to automate technical workflows, not manage incidents end-to-end.
Playbooks assume defined scenarios and reliable inputs. When incidents deviate, require legal interpretation, or demand executive judgment, automation pauses. SOAR also runs in-band, relying on the same identity and collaboration infrastructure that may be compromised during an attack.
SOAR can isolate endpoints and disable accounts.
It cannot coordinate executive briefings, approve external communications, or document cross-functional decisions in a regulator-ready format.
SOAR executes response actions. It does not manage the incident lifecycle.
Incident Management: The Missing Command Layer
Incident management encompasses more than detection and containment. It includes declaration, coordination, communication, decision-making, documentation, and recovery across the entire organization.
The incident management command layer sits above SIEM and SOAR. It governs how technical response connects to business action.
This is where incidents are formally declared, roles are assigned, decisions are approved, and actions are documented across IT, legal, PR, executives, and external partners. It provides a secure operating environment when pressure, scrutiny, and risk are highest.
An effective incident management command layer provides:
- A secure, out-of-band workspace independent of corporate identity
- Role-based access and task ownership across functions
- Executive dashboards without SOC access
- Immutable, time-stamped audit trails
- One-click reporting for regulators and insurers
Instead of fragmented tools and side-channel communication, every stakeholder operates from a single, authoritative source of truth throughout the incident lifecycle.
Why Out-of-Band Is Foundational to Incident Management
Major incidents often compromise the systems teams rely on to coordinate. Identity compromise, business email compromise, insider risk, and ransomware targeting domain controllers all make in-band communication unsafe.
SIEM and SOAR may continue to function.
Incident management does not—unless coordination moves out-of-band.
An out-of-band incident management platform operates independently of Active Directory, email, and collaboration tools. It preserves secure communication, decision-making, and documentation even when core systems are untrusted or offline.
Without it, organizations improvise. Decisions lack attribution. Timelines are reconstructed after the fact—often when regulators, insurers, or boards are asking precise questions.
How SIEM, SOAR, and Incident Management Work Together
Each layer plays a distinct role:
- SIEM detects and investigates
- SOAR automates technical response
- Incident management coordinates decisions, communications, and recovery
During an incident, SIEM identifies malicious activity. SOAR executes containment. The incident management layer records approvals, assigns tasks, briefs stakeholders, and documents every decision from detection through recovery.
None replaces the others. Together, they form a complete, defensible incident management capability.
When Incident Management Becomes Critical
A dedicated incident management command layer is essential during:
- Identity compromise
- Suspected insider activity
- Regulatory-reportable incidents
If any of these conditions exist, in-band tools such as email, Teams, or Slack become operational risks rather than assets.
Final Takeaway
SIEM and SOAR are necessary—but they are not sufficient.
They support detection and response.
They do not manage incidents.
Effective incident management requires a command layer that governs people, decisions, communications, and accountability across the full incident lifecycle—securely and out-of-band.
ShadowHQ provides that incident management command layer, connecting technical response to business decision-making when it matters most.
If you want to see how out-of-band incident management works in practice:
- Book a demo: https://www.shadowhq.io/book-a-demo
-
Watch the on-demand preview: https://www.shadowhq.io/instant-preview-webinar