How Do We Choose the Right GRC Platform?

Choosing the right GRC platform should begin with the organization's business, cybersecurity and Cyber GRC requirements, not with a product demo.

A platform can support controls, frameworks, evidence, risk, policies, issues, third parties, assessments, workflows and reporting. But different organizations need different combinations of those capabilities, and the wrong platform can create more complexity instead of reducing it.

Hotman Group helps organizations define what they actually need from GRC technology, evaluate platforms against those requirements, make vendor-neutral selection decisions, and support implementation so the technology fits the program rather than forcing the program to fit the tool.

The most important question is not "Which GRC platform is best?" It is "Which GRC platform is right for this organization, this operating model, these requirements and these risks?"

Why Is Choosing a GRC Platform So Difficult?

Most GRC platforms can demonstrate impressive functionality.

They may show automated evidence collection, framework libraries, risk registers, dashboards, workflows, vendor management, policy management, continuous monitoring and artificial intelligence features.

Those capabilities may all be useful.

The challenge is determining which capabilities solve the organization's actual problems and which simply look attractive during a demonstration.

Organizations can also make the decision harder by comparing software before defining:

• What problems the platform needs to solve.
• Who will use it.
• Which processes it needs to support.
• Which frameworks and requirements it needs to manage.
• How controls should be structured.
• What evidence needs to be managed.
• How risk should be represented.
• What integrations matter.
• What workflows are required.
• What leadership needs to see.
• What resources will operate the platform.

Without those answers, the selection process can become a comparison of feature lists instead of a business decision.

Should We Choose a GRC Platform Based on Features?

Features matter, but they should be evaluated against defined requirements.

A capability has value only if the organization needs it and can use it effectively.

For example, a platform may offer sophisticated automation, but that does not help if the organization's processes are not defined.

It may include dozens of frameworks, but that does not help if the organization manages those frameworks separately and duplicates controls.

It may offer executive dashboards, but those dashboards are not useful if the underlying risk and control data is unreliable.

Features should support the operating model rather than substitute for one.

What Should We Define Before Looking at GRC Platforms?

Before evaluating vendors, define the business and program requirements.

That should include questions such as:

• What problems are we trying to solve?
• What Cyber GRC processes exist today?
• Which processes need to change?
• Which frameworks and requirements do we manage?
• Do we need one control structure across multiple frameworks?
• How should control ownership work?
• How do we manage evidence today?
• How do we manage cyber risk?
• Do we need third-party risk management?
• Do we need policy management?
• Do we need customer assurance support?
• What types of assessments do we perform?
• What workflows need automation?
• Which systems need to integrate?
• What reporting does leadership need?
• Who will administer the platform?
• Who will use it regularly?
• What implementation resources are available?
• What budget constraints exist?

These requirements create an evaluation framework that can be applied consistently across vendors.

Do We Actually Need a GRC Platform?

Not every organization does.

Some organizations can operate effectively with simpler tools, especially when the program is relatively small and requirements are limited.

A platform becomes more valuable as complexity increases across frameworks, controls, evidence, risk, third parties, workflows and reporting.

But purchasing technology simply because spreadsheets feel inconvenient can be premature.

See how to determine whether the organization actually needs a GRC platform.

What Problems Should a GRC Platform Solve?

The answer depends on the organization.

Common use cases include:

• Managing multiple cybersecurity frameworks.
• Mapping framework requirements to controls.
• Managing a common control framework.
• Assigning control ownership.
• Collecting and maintaining evidence.
• Tracking assessments and findings.
• Managing remediation.
• Maintaining cyber risk information.
• Managing policies.
• Managing third-party risk.
• Supporting customer security assurance.
• Automating workflows.
• Integrating with security and business systems.
• Providing leadership reporting.

The organization should prioritize those use cases before evaluating products.

Should We Pick the Platform Before Designing Our Cyber GRC Operating Model?

Usually no.

The operating model should define how governance, risk, controls, requirements, ownership, evidence and decisions work.

Technology should support those processes.

If the organization selects software first, the platform's default workflows and data structures can begin defining how the program operates.

That can lead to a program designed around software limitations rather than business needs.

See how to build a Cyber GRC operating model.

Should We Rationalize Our Controls Before Selecting a GRC Platform?

Often, yes.

If the organization has several framework-specific control libraries, loading all of them into a new platform may preserve unnecessary duplication.

The selection process should consider how the organization wants controls structured in the future.

That may involve reducing duplicate cybersecurity and compliance work or building a common control framework.

The platform should support the desired control model.

How Important Is Multi-Framework Support?

It can be very important for organizations managing several cybersecurity and compliance obligations.

The platform should help the organization map many framework requirements to shared controls where appropriate rather than requiring separate controls for every framework.

It should also preserve unique requirements when they genuinely differ.

Organizations managing several frameworks should understand how to build one cybersecurity program across multiple frameworks before evaluating how technology will support it.

How Important Is Evidence Automation?

Evidence automation can reduce manual work when the evidence source and control are well defined.

For example, a platform may connect to cloud, identity, endpoint or ticketing systems and collect evidence automatically.

But automatic collection does not guarantee useful evidence.

The organization still needs to determine what proves the control is operating and whether the collected information actually supports that conclusion.

Automation should support a good evidence strategy.

See how to centralize cybersecurity and compliance evidence without creating more work.

How Important Is Risk Management Capability?

That depends on how the organization intends to manage cyber risk.

A platform may support risk registers, scoring, treatment plans, ownership, monitoring and reporting.

But sophisticated risk features do not create a useful risk-management process by themselves.

The organization needs to define how risks are identified, assessed, prioritized, treated, accepted and communicated.

See how to build a cyber risk register leadership can actually use.

How Important Is Third-Party Risk Management?

If the organization has a significant third-party risk program, vendor management may be an important part of the platform decision.

Capabilities may include:

• Vendor inventories.
• Risk tiering.
• Questionnaires.
• Evidence collection.
• Assessments.
• Issue tracking.
• Remediation.
• Continuous monitoring.
• Reporting.

But technology should support a defined TPRM process.

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

Should Customer Security Questionnaires Influence the Platform Decision?

Potentially.

Some platforms can help maintain reusable security information, map responses to controls and evidence, or automate parts of the questionnaire process.

But if questionnaire pain is caused by weak control ownership, scattered evidence or inconsistent answers, the organization should address those root causes as well.

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

How Important Are Integrations?

Integrations matter when they support actual program use cases.

Potential integrations may include:

• Identity providers.
• Cloud platforms.
• Endpoint management.
• Vulnerability-management tools.
• Ticketing systems.
• HR systems.
• Document repositories.
• Security monitoring systems.
• Vendor-management systems.
• Collaboration tools.

The number of available integrations is less important than whether the platform integrates with the systems the organization actually uses and whether those integrations produce reliable information.

How Important Is Workflow Automation?

Workflow automation can improve consistency and reduce administrative effort.

But the workflow itself needs to make sense first.

Automating an inefficient approval process or unnecessary evidence request makes the problem faster, not better.

See how to automate compliance without automating bad processes.

How Important Is Reporting?

Reporting should help different audiences understand what they need to know.

Cyber GRC practitioners may need detailed information about controls, evidence, findings and workflows.

Control owners may need tasks and status information.

Executives may need material risks, major issues, trends and decisions requiring attention.

A platform should make that information easier to produce and trust.

A visually impressive dashboard is not useful if the underlying data does not reflect the program accurately.

How Should We Evaluate GRC Platform Vendors?

Use consistent requirements and scenarios.

Instead of allowing each vendor to deliver its standard demonstration, ask every vendor to show how the platform handles the organization's most important use cases.

Examples may include:

• Map several frameworks to shared controls.
• Assign control ownership across departments.
• Collect and reuse evidence.
• Manage a significant risk from identification through treatment.
• Track remediation from an assessment.
• Support an executive risk report.
• Manage a third-party assessment.
• Add a new framework to an existing control environment.

This allows the organization to compare how each platform solves the same problems.

Should We Use a Formal GRC Platform Requirements Matrix?

Usually, yes for a significant selection.

A requirements matrix can separate essential capabilities from preferences and allow platforms to be evaluated consistently.

Requirements might be categorized as:

• Business requirements.
• Functional requirements.
• Technical requirements.
• Integration requirements.
• Security requirements.
• Reporting requirements.
• Implementation requirements.
• Administrative requirements.
• Commercial requirements.

Not every requirement should receive the same weight.

The evaluation should reflect what matters most to the organization.

Should Price Be a Major Factor?

Yes, but total cost matters more than license price alone.

Consider:

• Subscription or license cost.
• Implementation.
• Configuration.
• Integrations.
• Data migration.
• Training.
• Administration.
• Support.
• Future modules or users.
• Internal resources required to operate the platform.

A less expensive platform can become more costly if it requires significant manual work or fails to support the operating model.

A sophisticated platform can also be poor value if the organization only uses a small fraction of its capabilities.

Should We Choose a Large Enterprise GRC Platform or a Simpler Platform?

Choose based on the organization's complexity and expected future state.

A highly configurable enterprise platform may be appropriate for a complex global organization with multiple GRC functions and extensive integration needs.

A smaller organization may achieve better results with a simpler platform that is easier to implement and operate.

More functionality is not automatically better.

The right level of complexity is the level the organization can use and sustain.

How Should Artificial Intelligence Features Affect Our Decision?

AI capabilities can be useful, but they should be evaluated as part of the broader platform rather than treated as a reason to select a product by themselves.

Potential uses may include summarization, control mapping, evidence review, questionnaire responses, policy support, risk analysis and workflow assistance.

Organizations should consider:

• What data the AI uses.
• How that data is protected.
• Whether results can be validated.
• How human review works.
• Whether the capability solves an actual problem.
• How the vendor's AI functionality may change over time.

The question is not whether the platform has AI. The question is whether its use of AI improves the organization's Cyber GRC program without creating unacceptable risk.

Should We Select a Platform Based on a Consultant's Partnership?

No.

Vendor relationships can give consultants valuable implementation knowledge, but the organization should understand whether a recommendation is influenced by resale arrangements, referral fees or partnership incentives.

The platform should be selected because it best fits the organization's requirements.

Hotman Group approaches GRC platform selection from a vendor-neutral perspective. The program and business requirements drive the evaluation.

What Are Common GRC Platform Selection Mistakes?

Common mistakes include:

• Buying before defining requirements.
• Selecting primarily from a product demonstration.
• Assuming more features mean a better fit.
• Choosing a platform because another company uses it.
• Allowing a vendor relationship to determine the recommendation.
• Failing to consider the operating model.
• Loading duplicate framework controls into the new platform.
• Underestimating implementation effort.
• Ignoring administration and maintenance requirements.
• Failing to involve actual users.
• Buying automation before fixing processes.
• Assuming technology can replace governance or expertise.

What If We Already Have a GRC Platform and Are Considering Replacing It?

Understand why the current platform is not working before selecting another one.

The technology may genuinely be a poor fit.

But the problem may involve implementation, governance, ownership, data structure, control design, integrations, workflows or user adoption.

Replacing software without fixing those issues can reproduce the same outcome.

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

How Important Is Implementation in the Platform Decision?

Very important.

A strong product can fail if implementation does not translate the organization's operating model into the platform effectively.

The selection process should consider:

• Implementation approach.
• Available expertise.
• Data migration.
• Configuration complexity.
• Integration effort.
• User adoption.
• Training.
• Testing.
• Ongoing administration.

See how to implement a GRC platform correctly.

How Does Hotman Group Help Organizations Choose GRC Platforms?

Hotman Group helps organizations define the GRC technology problem before evaluating products.

The work may include understanding the current program, defining business and functional requirements, establishing desired processes, identifying integration and reporting needs, developing evaluation criteria, comparing platforms and supporting vendor demonstrations and decision-making.

HG's approach is vendor-neutral and program-first.

The objective is not to identify the platform with the longest feature list.

The objective is to select technology that supports the organization's cybersecurity, governance, risk and compliance operating model and can be realistically implemented and sustained.

Can Hotman Group Help Implement the Platform After Selection?

Yes.

Platform selection and implementation are closely connected.

Hotman Group can help translate the requirements and operating model used during selection into controls, workflows, ownership, evidence processes, risk structures, integrations and reporting within the selected platform.

This continuity can help reduce the gap between what the organization believed it was buying and what users eventually experience.

What If We Do Not Know Whether Our Problem Is the Platform or the GRC Program?

You do not need to decide that first.

The visible technology problem may involve program design, governance, ownership, processes, framework structure or resources.

If it is difficult to distinguish the software problem from the broader Cyber GRC problem, 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.