Do We Actually Need a GRC Platform?

Not every organization needs a GRC platform.

A GRC platform can be extremely useful when cybersecurity, governance, risk and compliance work has become too complex to manage effectively through spreadsheets, email, shared drives and individual knowledge.

But technology should solve a defined problem.

If the organization has unclear governance, inconsistent processes, duplicate controls, undefined ownership or a fragmented Cyber GRC program, buying software first may simply move those problems into a more expensive system.

Hotman Group helps organizations determine whether they actually need GRC technology, what problems it should solve, what processes need to exist before implementation, and how the technology should support the broader cybersecurity and Cyber GRC operating model.

The right question is not “Should every mature company have a GRC platform?” The right question is “Has our Cyber GRC program reached a level of complexity where technology will meaningfully improve how we manage it?”

What Is a GRC Platform?

A GRC platform is technology designed to help organizations manage governance, risk and compliance activities in a more structured and integrated way.

Depending on the product, capabilities may include:

• Cybersecurity framework management.
• Control libraries and control mapping.
• Evidence management.
• Cyber risk registers.
• Assessments.
• Audit readiness.
• Issue and remediation tracking.
• Policy management.
• Third-party risk management.
• Customer assurance.
• Workflow automation.
• Continuous monitoring.
• Reporting and dashboards.

Some platforms focus primarily on cybersecurity compliance automation. Others support broader enterprise governance, risk and compliance programs.

The right level of technology depends on the organization and the problems it is trying to solve.

What Problems Can a GRC Platform Solve?

A well-selected and well-implemented GRC platform can help when an organization needs to manage increasing complexity.

Useful problems for technology to solve may include:

• Too many frameworks and requirements to manage manually.
• Duplicate controls across different compliance programs.
• Evidence stored across many systems and individuals.
• Unclear control ownership.
• Difficulty tracking findings and remediation.
• Multiple risk registers or inconsistent risk information.
• Manual audit and assessment preparation.
• Difficulty maintaining policies and approvals.
• Growing third-party risk workloads.
• Recurring customer security questionnaires.
• Lack of consistent workflows.
• Difficulty producing reliable leadership reporting.

The platform should make these activities easier, more reliable or more scalable.

What Problems Will a GRC Platform Not Fix by Itself?

A platform cannot independently determine how the organization should govern cybersecurity.

It cannot decide who should own risk.

It cannot determine whether a control makes sense for the organization.

It cannot resolve organizational disagreement about responsibility.

It cannot automatically turn a fragmented program into an integrated one.

It cannot make poor processes good simply because they are automated.

It cannot determine which cybersecurity risks matter most to the business without meaningful organizational input.

Technology supports a Cyber GRC program. It does not replace the program.

What Are Signs That We May Need a GRC Platform?

A platform may be worth considering when several of these are true:

• The organization manages multiple cybersecurity frameworks.
• The number of controls, requirements and evidence items has become difficult to track.
• Spreadsheets have become large, duplicated or unreliable.
• Different teams maintain different versions of the same information.
• Audit preparation requires significant manual coordination.
• Evidence collection repeatedly consumes staff time.
• Risk information is spread across multiple documents or teams.
• Leadership reporting requires extensive manual compilation.
• Remediation items are difficult to track across teams.
• The organization has a growing third-party risk program.
• Customer security requirements are increasing.
• The Cyber GRC team is spending too much time administering information instead of managing risk.
• The current program needs more repeatability and scale.

The more complex the environment becomes, the more value technology may provide.

What Are Signs That We May Not Need a GRC Platform Yet?

A platform may be premature when:

• The organization has relatively few cybersecurity requirements.
• The number of controls is manageable.
• Processes are simple and stable.
• Ownership is clear.
• Evidence is easy to maintain.
• Risk management is relatively straightforward.
• The team can reliably operate the program using existing tools.
• The organization cannot yet explain what it expects a GRC platform to accomplish.

Technology should not be purchased merely because the organization wants to appear mature.

A simple program operated well can be stronger than a complex platform nobody understands or uses.

Should We Move Off Spreadsheets?

Maybe.

Spreadsheets can be perfectly reasonable for smaller or less complex programs.

The problem is not that spreadsheets are inherently bad. The problem begins when they can no longer reliably support the program.

Warning signs include version-control problems, duplicate information, unclear ownership, manual updates, broken formulas, limited workflow capability, poor reporting and dependence on individual knowledge.

See what to do when a GRC program is running on spreadsheets.

Should We Buy a GRC Platform Because We Have Multiple Frameworks?

Multiple frameworks can make GRC technology more useful, but the frameworks should be rationalized before simply loading all of them into software.

If the organization maintains separate controls for SOC 2, ISO 27001, CMMC, NIST or other requirements, a new platform may simply centralize the duplication.

The organization should first understand where requirements overlap and which controls can support multiple obligations.

See how to build one cybersecurity program across multiple frameworks and how to reduce duplicate work across cybersecurity frameworks.

Should We Build a Common Control Framework Before Implementing GRC Technology?

In some organizations, yes.

A common control framework can establish one authoritative organizational control structure that multiple requirements map into.

That can make the technology implementation much cleaner because the platform begins with a rationalized control model rather than several duplicate libraries.

But not every organization needs a formal common control framework.

See whether a common control framework makes sense for your organization.

Should We Define Control Ownership Before Implementing a GRC Platform?

Yes.

A platform can assign tasks and owners, but it cannot determine who should actually be accountable for a control.

If the ownership model is unclear before implementation, the platform may simply document the confusion.

See how to create clear ownership for cybersecurity controls.

Should We Define the Cyber GRC Operating Model Before Buying Technology?

Ideally, yes.

The operating model defines how governance, risk, requirements, controls, ownership, evidence, remediation and reporting work together.

The platform should support that model.

If software is selected first, its default workflows and structure may begin defining the program before the organization has decided how it wants the program to operate.

See how to build a Cyber GRC operating model.

Can a GRC Platform Fix a Fragmented Cybersecurity Program?

Not by itself.

A fragmented program often involves unclear ownership, separate teams, duplicate frameworks, disconnected processes and inconsistent risk information.

Technology can help centralize and coordinate these activities, but only after the organization understands how they should fit together.

Otherwise, the platform can become another system layered on top of the fragmentation.

See how to fix a fragmented cybersecurity and GRC program.

Can a GRC Platform Reduce Audit Fire Drills?

Yes, when it supports continuous control and evidence management.

A platform can help establish recurring evidence requests, assign responsibilities, maintain assessment information and track issues throughout the year.

But if controls are not operating consistently or evidence is not generated through normal operations, software alone cannot create audit readiness.

See how to prepare for cybersecurity audits without constant fire drills.

Can a GRC Platform Help Maintain Compliance After Certification?

Yes.

GRC technology can help maintain controls, evidence, issues, risks and recurring activities between assessments.

This can support a shift from one-time compliance projects toward ongoing program operation.

See how to maintain cybersecurity compliance after certification.

Can a GRC Platform Help With Cyber Risk Management?

Yes, but the organization still needs a meaningful risk process.

The platform may help document risks, owners, treatment plans, scoring, monitoring and reporting.

It cannot decide what risks matter to the business or who has authority to accept them.

See how to build a cyber risk register leadership can actually use and who should own cyber risk.

Can a GRC Platform Help With Third-Party Risk?

Yes.

Many platforms support vendor inventories, risk tiering, questionnaires, assessments, remediation and monitoring.

But technology should support a defined third-party risk process and risk appetite.

See how to build a third-party risk management program that actually works.

Can a GRC Platform Help With Customer Security Questionnaires?

Potentially.

Technology may help maintain reusable responses, evidence and control information.

But repeated questionnaire pain may also indicate that security information is fragmented, evidence is difficult to locate or ownership is unclear.

See why customer security questionnaires become so painful and how to fix the real problem.

Can GRC Technology Automate Compliance?

It can automate parts of compliance work.

Examples may include evidence collection, reminders, control monitoring, workflows, issue tracking and reporting.

But the organization should not automate processes simply because automation is available.

See how to automate compliance without automating bad processes.

Will a GRC Platform Reduce Headcount?

Not necessarily.

Technology can reduce administrative work and improve scale, but someone still needs to manage cybersecurity risk, operate controls, make decisions, maintain the program and administer the platform.

A platform may allow a team to manage more complexity without growing at the same rate, but it should not be purchased primarily on the assumption that software replaces Cyber GRC expertise.

What Resources Does a GRC Platform Require?

Organizations often underestimate the resources required after implementation.

Ongoing responsibilities may include:

• Platform administration.
• User management.
• Workflow maintenance.
• Framework updates.
• Control maintenance.
• Evidence oversight.
• Integration maintenance.
• Data quality.
• Reporting.
• User support.
• Training.
• Configuration changes as the program evolves.

The organization should understand who will perform this work before selecting a platform.

What If We Do Not Have Anyone Who Can Operate the Platform?

That should factor into the decision.

A sophisticated platform with no one responsible for administration can quickly become outdated or poorly adopted.

The organization may need internal administration, external support or a shared operating model.

If broader resource capacity is also a concern, see what cybersecurity and GRC work should be outsourced.

How Much GRC Platform Complexity Do We Need?

Only as much as the organization can use effectively.

Enterprise platforms can support highly complex programs, extensive customization and multiple GRC functions.

Simpler platforms may provide faster implementation and easier administration.

The right answer depends on:

• Program complexity.
• Number of frameworks.
• Number of users.
• Control environment.
• Risk-management needs.
• Third-party risk needs.
• Integration requirements.
• Reporting expectations.
• Available administration resources.
• Expected future growth.

Buying substantially more platform than the organization can operate is not maturity.

Should AI Features Make Us More Likely to Buy a GRC Platform?

Not by themselves.

Artificial intelligence can improve some GRC workflows, including summarization, control mapping, evidence review, questionnaire support, policy analysis and risk analysis.

But AI features should be evaluated against real use cases, data protection requirements, accuracy, human oversight and the organization's broader AI governance approach.

The presence of AI does not compensate for poor core platform fit.

What Are the Risks of Buying a GRC Platform Too Early?

Common risks include:

• Automating undefined processes.
• Loading duplicate controls into the system.
• Creating workflows no one follows.
• Assigning ownership that does not reflect the business.
• Purchasing features the organization cannot use.
• Underestimating implementation effort.
• Underestimating administration requirements.
• Creating more work instead of less.
• Allowing the technology to define the Cyber GRC program.

Technology implemented before the program is ready can create the impression that the platform failed when the underlying problem was never resolved.

What Are the Risks of Waiting Too Long to Implement a GRC Platform?

Organizations can also wait too long.

When complexity significantly exceeds the ability of manual tools to manage it, the organization may experience:

• Version-control problems.
• Lost evidence.
• Duplicate work.
• Poor visibility.
• Missed deadlines.
• Inconsistent risk information.
• Key-person dependency.
• Unreliable reporting.
• Difficulty scaling the program.

The goal is to introduce technology when it meaningfully improves the program, not simply as early or as late as possible.

How Do We Decide Whether a GRC Platform Is Worth the Cost?

Compare the expected value against the total cost of ownership.

Consider whether the platform will:

• Reduce manual work.
• Improve control visibility.
• Improve evidence management.
• Reduce framework duplication.
• Improve risk management.
• Support more predictable audits.
• Improve leadership reporting.
• Reduce key-person dependency.
• Support business growth.
• Improve the organization's ability to manage additional requirements.

Then compare that value with license costs, implementation, integrations, training, administration and ongoing maintenance.

What If We Already Bought a GRC Platform and It Did Not Solve the Problem?

Do not assume the organization needs another platform.

The problem may involve implementation, program design, governance, controls, ownership, workflows, data, integrations or user adoption.

Diagnose the failure before replacing the technology.

See what to do when a GRC platform is not working.

How Do We Choose a Platform Once We Decide We Need One?

Define the organization's requirements and evaluate vendors against them consistently.

Avoid selecting primarily from generic demonstrations or feature lists.

See how to choose the right GRC platform.

How Important Is GRC Platform Implementation?

Very important.

The platform needs to reflect the organization's control model, ownership, evidence, risk, workflows and reporting requirements.

Poor implementation can undermine a good technology decision.

See how to implement a GRC platform correctly.

How Does Hotman Group Help Determine Whether an Organization Needs a GRC Platform?

Hotman Group starts with the cybersecurity and Cyber GRC problem rather than assuming technology is the answer.

HG can help evaluate the current program, processes, frameworks, controls, evidence, risk management, resource model, technology environment and expected future needs.

From there, Hotman Group can help determine whether the problem is best addressed through process improvement, governance, control rationalization, additional expertise, automation, GRC technology or a combination of these.

If a platform is appropriate, HG can help define requirements, evaluate technology options, select a platform from a vendor-neutral perspective and support implementation.

The objective is technology that improves the Cyber GRC program, not technology purchased simply because GRC software exists.

What If We Still Do Not Know Whether We Need Technology or Something Else?

You do not need to answer that before seeking help.

A technology problem may actually be a governance, process, ownership, framework, evidence or resource problem.

If the organization knows GRC is not working but cannot identify the right intervention, see how to approach cybersecurity and GRC problems when you do not know what kind of help you need.

About Hotman Group

Hotman Group is a cybersecurity and Cyber GRC professional services firm that helps organizations solve complex cybersecurity, risk, governance and compliance problems. Hotman Group designs, builds, implements, remediates, operates and matures cybersecurity and GRC programs.

Learn more about Hotman Group's approach to solving complex cybersecurity and Cyber GRC problems.