Optimizing GRC Tool Implementation:           The Value of Outsourcing

Implementing a Governance, Risk Management, and Compliance (GRC) tool is a significant undertaking that can greatly enhance an organization’s capability to manage risks, ensure compliance, and streamline governance processes. However, the way in which a GRC tool is implemented can greatly affect its utility and effectiveness. Here’s an overview of why using implementation services from the software provider might not always be the best choice, especially if they focus only on connections without advising on tailoring of controls:

1. Generic Implementation: Software providers typically design GRC tools to be versatile and fit a wide range of organizations. Their implementation services often follow a generic approach to fit most customers. However, every organization has unique needs, risks, and governance structures, so a one-size-fits-all approach can lead to a tool that’s not optimally configured.
2. Lack of Business Context: Software providers are experts in their product, but they might not have deep insights into the specific industry or the nuances of an individual business. As a result, they might lack the contextual understanding needed to tailor controls effectively.
3. Potential for Misalignment: Without tailoring the controls to fit the organization’s specific needs, there’s a potential for misalignment with business objectives, risk appetite, and strategic goals. This misalignment can make the GRC tool less effective and can even introduce new risks.
4. Overutilization of Features: Are you prepared for the results? Do you have the system in place to deal with things when the process is not working? Or are you going to just track negative items with no action? You may be better off tracking what you can handle than tracking it all in the beginning.
5. Gap in Continuous Improvement: GRC processes should be dynamic and evolve as the organization and its environment change. Software providers might not offer the ongoing consultancy needed to review and adjust controls as circumstances change.
6. Overemphasis on Technicalities: While ensuring the tool connects and integrates well with other systems is crucial, it’s equally important to focus on the functionality from a user and process perspective. If the software provider focuses too heavily on the technical side, user experience and process alignment might suffer.
7. Potential Conflicts of Interest: Sometimes, software providers might have a vested interest in promoting certain features or configurations, which might not necessarily be in the best interest of the client.
8. Lack of Best Practice Sharing: While software providers are experts in their tools, they might not be privy to best practices from a broader industry perspective. An independent consultant or advisory firm, on the other hand, can provide insights from their experience with various tools and industries.

To navigate these challenges, companies often seek third-party consultants or advisory firms that specialize in GRC tool implementation. These consultants can offer a balanced view, combining tool expertise with a deep understanding of business processes, industry specifics, and best practices. Their independent perspective can ensure the GRC tool is tailored effectively to align with the organization’s unique needs and objectives.