Microsoft Entra ID Governance Reviews

I use Microsoft Entra ID Governance for identity and access management as well as access recertification.

The workflows such as joiner, mover, and leaver work in Microsoft Entra ID Governance. Entitlement Management is a bundle of resources where Microsoft Entra ID applications, groups, and SharePoint sites are packaged into a single package so that users can request it. This is one of the great features for Microsoft Entra ID Governance. Another feature is Access Review, which allows an automated schedule to be managed for the manager or resource owner so that they can verify whether people still need access. Privileged Identity Management is another feature for governance that provides just-in-time (JIT) access for administrative roles. For example, instead of being a permanent or global admin, which is a major security risk, an IT professional is eligible for the role and must request four hours of access only when they need to perform a specific task.

There is a feature called access package. If any user wants particular application access, they can request this application via Microsoft Entra ID Governance access package. Whenever an end user makes a request, the access goes to one application manager and their current line manager. If they approve it, then they get the application access. This is a very good feature for user-centric purposes.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance includes securing AI agent identity. As a company uses more AI generation such as Copilots or custom bots, those bots need their own identity just as employees do. Microsoft Entra now provides a way to assign unique identities to AI agents so you can control what data they can access. Microsoft Entra ID Governance protection now looks for risky behavior in AI agents. If a bot suddenly tries to download an unusual amount of data or unconscious data, it can detect this as a risk detection factor. Security Copilot allows Entra administrators to manage identity with natural language.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance has protection and authentication features. Smart risk detection protects and analyzes to detect threats such as impossible travel. If a person is logging in from many different locations, it detects this as a risk factor. A user cannot use an unauthenticated password or log in from an incompatible device. These AI features are used in conditional access management in Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

Automation is used for user onboarding, user offboarding, and user update processes through user lifecycle management. If an organization uses Workday as an HR application where new users join and fill in their details, all these details get reflected into Workday and then reflected into Active Directory as well as Microsoft Entra ID Governance. This automation helps to manage the day-to-day user onboarding process, user offboarding process, and user update process. Microsoft Entra ID Governance automation also helps with password-related tasks, access recertification, and reporting.

The workflows such as joiner, mover, and leaver work in Microsoft Entra ID Governance. Entitlement Management is a bundle of resources where Microsoft Entra ID applications, groups, and SharePoint sites are packaged into a single package so that users can request it. This is one of the great features for Microsoft Entra ID Governance. Another feature is Access Review, which allows an automated schedule to be managed for the manager or resource owner so that they can verify whether people still need access. Privileged Identity Management is another feature for governance that provides just-in-time (JIT) access for administrative roles. For example, instead of being a permanent or global admin, which is a major security risk, an IT professional is eligible for the role and must request four hours of access only when they need to perform a specific task.

There is a feature called access package. If any user wants particular application access, they can request this application via Microsoft Entra ID Governance access package. Whenever an end user makes a request, the access goes to one application manager and their current line manager. If they approve it, then they get the application access. This is a very good feature for user-centric purposes.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance includes securing AI agent identity. As a company uses more AI generation such as Copilots or custom bots, those bots need their own identity just as employees do. Microsoft Entra now provides a way to assign unique identities to AI agents so you can control what data they can access. Microsoft Entra ID Governance protection now looks for risky behavior in AI agents. If a bot suddenly tries to download an unusual amount of data or unconscious data, it can detect this as a risk detection factor. Security Copilot allows Entra administrators to manage identity with natural language.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance has protection and authentication features. Smart risk detection protects and analyzes to detect threats such as impossible travel. If a person is logging in from many different locations, it detects this as a risk factor. A user cannot use an unauthenticated password or log in from an incompatible device. These AI features are used in conditional access management in Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

Automation is used for user onboarding, user offboarding, and user update processes through user lifecycle management. If an organization uses Workday as an HR application where new users join and fill in their details, all these details get reflected into Workday and then reflected into Active Directory as well as Microsoft Entra ID Governance. This automation helps to manage the day-to-day user onboarding process, user offboarding process, and user update process. Microsoft Entra ID Governance automation also helps with password-related tasks, access recertification, and reporting.

There is one feature that I do not prefer. If a manager approves access for a particular user and wants to change their decision about whether the user should retain access or not, once they approve, they cannot change their decision. Microsoft needs to work on this. If a manager could change their decision and approve or deny access again for the same privileged user, it would be beneficial. However, this feature is not provided by Microsoft Entra ID Governance. This is a minor issue, but the rest of the features are very good.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID Governance for the last two years.

I would rate stability at eight out of ten.

I have not faced any scalability issues, so I can give a full ten out of ten.

I would rate customer service at three out of ten.

The initial setup took almost one week for requirement gathering, one week for testing, and one week for deployment, totaling almost three weeks including requirement gathering, testing, and deployment.

It is easy to construct, but it depends on the requirement. If it is a complex scenario, it would take time for testing, requirement gathering, and then the build. However, for deployment, once all these steps are successful, deployment would take around one week. It depends on the complexity of the project.

The cost is moderate, not so cheap and not so over-expensive.

When comparing with Okta, Microsoft Entra ID Governance has very deep integration related to the Microsoft ecosystem, including Office 365, Microsoft Azure, and Windows. However, when compared to Okta, it works seamlessly across diverse multiple cloud environments. Microsoft Entra ID Governance has almost 3,500 pre-integrated applications for SSO integration based on OAuth, OIDC, and SAML. However, Okta has around 7,000 plus pre-built integrations. The cost is very less when compared to Okta. Because with Okta, you need to buy a separate subscription and it can be more expensive as a stand-alone tool. However, when compared to Microsoft, it is often free or bundled with existing M365 licenses. If an organization has an E3 or E5 license, then they can use multiple Microsoft applications. Regarding admin experience, both are almost the same, but Okta is more user-friendly. Regarding the policy engine, in Microsoft Entra ID Governance, conditional access applies broad or organization-wide rules. However, in Okta, it has granular sign-on policies which can be easily customized for individual applications. This is the difference, but it depends on which the organization wants to prefer. However, most organizations prefer Microsoft Entra ID Governance because it provides various Microsoft applications including Office 365, where they can use Outlook and Teams, and also Microsoft Azure and Windows licenses. So it would be good if in one license they have all this package. Therefore, most organizations prefer Microsoft Entra ID Governance over Okta.

I would recommend Microsoft Entra ID Governance for organizations that are using the Microsoft ecosystem including Office 365, Outlook, Teams, Azure, and Windows, and also want something cheaper compared to other options. Organizations that can afford the cost-related aspects and want around 7,000 pre-built integrations as well as a user-friendly UI should consider Okta.

The best features are Access Review and Entitlement Management.

Recertification can be run on-demand as and when any recertification slip occurs. There is also time-based recertification, which we run every quarter. During this time, all privileged users get certified by their managers regarding whether they want access or not. All three features can be used in Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

There is a feature called access package. If any user wants particular application access, they can request this application via Microsoft Entra ID Governance access package. Whenever an end user makes a request, the access goes to one application manager and their current line manager. If they approve it, then they get the application access. This is a very good feature for user-centric purposes.

The organization has almost 7,000 users.

I do not have any experience with machine learning related to Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

My overall rating for Microsoft Entra ID Governance is nine out of ten.

My main use cases for Microsoft Entra ID Governance are access reviews, but specifically Privileged Identity Management access reviews.

I am utilizing the user-centric access reviews in Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance has changed my approach in reviewing the multiple applications and groups because it gave us an approach.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID Governance that I like the most are probably access reviews, along with the Lifecycle Management policies. Those are really nice.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID Governance have benefited our organization because we have ServiceNow in our organization and we have been able to create integrations through Lifecycle Management to do onboarding and offboarding easier. The access reviews are extremely heavy for us. We have privileged accounts in the environment, and we need to do access reviews for those privileged accounts. This allows us to do it. The Privileged Identity Management part of it, which is locked behind the IGA step-up, has been beneficial. We can now control who has access to what and how long they have access to what.

I am not using the access review agent feature in Microsoft Entra ID Governance because that is in preview right now, and I do not know if that is available.

My perception of Microsoft Entra ID Governance's ability to handle large volumes of users access and management tasks is good. There is a slight delay from creation of the actual access review to how long it takes to complete the actual review. For us, we are a large organization with over ten thousand employees. If we are doing a review on a larger group that has thousands of employees inside of it, it takes a while to actually complete, and then it becomes a headache for managers. If there were a way to condense that or decrease the amount of time it takes to do it, that would be better. We inspect thousands of people.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance can be improved, and I actually have two tickets in with you now about improvements. I would have to dig it up because I do not know off the top of my head, but you can find it. We have two tickets that have been put in by the FastTrack team that I work with for identity governance. I think it was something about the ability to stop reviews early. When you create an access review now, and you put a time gate on it, say it is the end of this week, once the access review is finished, the managers went in there and finished the access review, you cannot finish it until the end of the week. That is a slight problem because we do not get a notification for people that are on the identity side that they have actually finished that, and I think there are two tickets in for that right now.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID Governance for two years, maybe two and a half years.

I would assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID Governance as having outages all the time, but it is not that bad. It is about four nines.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance scales with the growing needs of my organization exceptionally.

I would evaluate my customer service and technical support experience as four out of five stars, maybe, because we are a huge company and we have a lot of Microsoft managers and CSAs.

From one being the worst and ten being the best, I would rate my customer service and technical support as a six. It depends on who you get, and that is a really hard question to answer.

Neutral

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID Governance, I was using Excel spreadsheets to address similar needs.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID as easy with the FastTrack team.

What worked during deployment of Microsoft Entra ID Governance was everything else. Timing was the only thing that was a challenge.

I have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Entra ID Governance is that it is always too expensive with Microsoft.

I did not really look at much before selecting Microsoft Entra ID Governance because before I joined this company, I was already using access reviews. It was kind of a no-brainer. I think internally the company looked at other products including Sentinel and a couple other things, but I had already set in my mind that we were going to use the identity governance product.

The machine learning in Microsoft Entra ID Governance has aided my access decision-making process a little, specifically with the audit review feature that pops up, which lets me know if people have logged in in the past thirty days or not. That is helpful, but I do not know if the managers actually care. They just will say approval because the employee needs it.

I would assess the effectiveness of the AI helping me govern Microsoft Entra ID at my organization as high.

I would assess the impact of Microsoft Entra ID Governance's automation features on overall productivity as good.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance has helped reduce the time spent by IAM specialists on a new hire onboarding task, and that is a tough question to answer. It has reduced it for sure. There is no doubt about that because the Lifecycle Management part automatically does things such as creates tickets and it can push out device creation tickets. It has decreased it, but I do not know that it has done it to the level we wanted it to be where it is fully automated. We have not gotten there yet.

To share an example, we have to do semi-annual reviews of access within the environment for privileged accounts, and we can now prove that we are doing that because we have the access reviews in place for it.

The process when I had to expand with Microsoft Entra ID Governance was smooth because we have been using Entra ID, or Azure, whatever it used to be called before it was Entra ID, for ten years or something. I do not know if expand is the right word. We just add more employees.

From one being the worst and ten being the best, I would rate Microsoft Entra ID Governance overall a nine. I rate this review nine out of ten.

Clients may use Microsoft Entra ID Governance for various identity management tasks.

The features of this product stand out as the best, which make the solution effective.

Analytics can be useful for web applications and financial solutions.

Microsoft integration is quite good.

I utilize reporting and auditing capabilities, which are particularly useful.

In terms of integration, improvements could be made.

To enhance integration, they could provide out-of-box integration with HashiCorp. This out-of-box integration with HashiCorp or another product would be beneficial, as that's still evolving.

Integrations with out-of-the-box applications remain an area for improvement.

I have been using it for one and a half years.

For scalability, I would rate it nine out of ten.

I rate technical support seven out of ten.

They don't have many resources, which is why I give it seven.

Positive

The installation process is easy and straightforward.

The pricing is good, and I think the solution is affordable.

I don't have experience working with SAP, SalePoint, or any other similar solutions.

I am currently working in the field of identity management and work with Microsoft Entra ID Governance as a consultant.

I am not a reseller or distributor.

The features of this product are excellent, though it's not as good as the market leaders.

The solution has excellent stability, which I would rate as nine out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

My core experience today is more in Office 365 migrations and Azure. At the same time, we need to check out the Active Directory for security purposes. The tools are pretty helpful for that.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for three to four years. It is not something that we use every month. When we have a customer that needs it, then we use the product. That could be every six months or maybe once a year. It depends on which customer or what we need with the customer.

For Microsoft Entra ID Governance, we are not using it. We are using it more for local on-premise Active Directory.

For Microsoft Entra ID Governance, we have been using native tools from Microsoft to do the governance of Azure and Microsoft Entra ID.

Regarding Microsoft Entra ID Governance integration with Microsoft services, there is automated identity lifecycle management in the product. I think it improves compliance for our clients. The reporting and auditing capabilities are fine.

I can provide examples of what Microsoft should improve now. The most critical parts of Microsoft Entra ID Governance that clients need time to manage include navigating the interface, which can be quite difficult, and there are some customization problems.

The most critical aspects that clients should focus on are DLP, security-related things, and reliability. Sometimes, the solution is not super reliable. The main areas for improvement would be security, DLP, and reliability.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for three to four years. It is not something that we use every month. When we have a customer that needs it, then we use the product. That could be every six months or maybe once a year. It depends on which customer or what we need with the customer.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance can be glitchy with some latency issues. The reliability would be around 80-90%.

The solution has some limitations regarding scalability, and it can be expensive to scale.

I would rate technical support from Microsoft nine out of ten points.

Positive

The installation of Microsoft Entra ID can be quite difficult.

The pricing for Microsoft Entra ID is acceptable.

I do not work with Azure products such as Azure AI Search, Data Box, or Speech service. Other colleagues in the department might work with Azure DevOps Server, but I do not. I am using Microsoft Entra ID from Microsoft. I rate Microsoft Entra ID Governance 9 out of 10.

The main use case for Microsoft Entra ID Governance is conducting periodic access reviews to ensure there are no accumulated entitlements and people only have access relevant to their work. So, primarily, it is used for access reviews.

The most valuable functions in Microsoft Entra ID Governance are ease of use, conducting access reviews, and tighter platform coupling. I can suggest a few configurations and then start an access review for the in-scope applications.

Microsoft Entra ID helps in reducing human errors in access control because it is less error-prone during access reviews. It helps correct actions such as unnecessary access privileges within the system.

Microsoft can improve Microsoft Entra ID Governance by expanding in the ID space, typically by offering a full lifecycle management solution and tighter or native integrations with database and web service-based applications. That would help build Microsoft Entra ID as a converged ITA plus AM plus TAM solution.

I feel that on-premises connectivity and more integrations to third-party applications should be improved. The rest is good.

I have been working with Microsoft Entra ID Governance for one year.

I would rate the stability of Microsoft Entra ID Governance a seven. It's not about downtime but more regarding tighter conversions integrations.

The scalability of Microsoft Entra ID Governance is good, having seen customer sizes of approximately seven hundred thousand to eight hundred thousand users.

I can recommend Microsoft Entra ID Governance for all company sizes, from smaller deployments of one thousand to deployments up to a million users.

I don't have direct conversation with Microsoft technical support, as I'm currently involved in leading the ID part, so I cannot comment on that.

Positive

My opinion on the initial setup for Microsoft Entra ID Governance is that it's very simple. You just subscribe to the relevant license agreement, and you get that feature.

I consider all the standard ID products, such as SailPoint and others, as the main competitors for Microsoft Entra ID Governance.

I am still working with Azure and using Microsoft products, working in a services company where my customers use Azure products for their directory M365 and SSO platform.

I have worked with Microsoft Entra ID Governance for a small customer with less than ten thousand identities. I mostly work on Microsoft Entra ID as a user directory and access management platform, onboarding applications with support for OpenID Connect or for single sign-on.

I have worked on user lifecycle management via the use of additional Azure ID, specifically the IDR product. This applies to user lifecycle across enterprise applications, such as the use of SailPoint or RSIGM.

Microsoft Entra ID is easy to integrate with other Microsoft services and third-party applications if it is Entra ID group-based. If you want to conduct access review of database-based applications, then you cannot do that. Easy integration with Microsoft Entra ID umbrella services is possible, as is easy integration with Entra ID SSO-based applications. However, other integration types database or web service integration are not possible because it's not a full-fledged ID product.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Microsoft Entra ID Governance a 7 out of 10.

Positive

We use it throughout the company. My colleagues and I are utilizing it, and we are creating access packages and so forth. We are using it for the entire company to manage access.

The MyApps and policies are valuable. It is compliant with our RVIT and CSB guidelines. We have regulations from regular Telecom, and Microsoft improves it in this case.

There are some areas where improvements are necessary. Even though we have almost the full package, there are some bugs. I cannot directly perform some tasks from the portal. First, I have to go to the policy, change it, and then return to the package to add it. I cannot do it directly from the package. Workarounds are needed, so that can be improved. At the moment, that is the only issue we are facing that needs enhancement.

I have used the solution for three years.

Service is perfect. However, the response time depends on the contract I have with Microsoft. The response time is generally within an hour and depends on the case and its priority. Still, I may need to provide a lot of information before they begin investigating.

Neutral

We have a significant discount from Microsoft.

I am very happy with the solution. We are using the complete Microsoft suite with  XDR, and EDR, all kinds of stuff. We have a complete suite and are fully compliant with XDR for Microsoft. 

We are a customer. 

I would rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

I use it to manage my Office 365 environment for Exchange, Teams, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication with Duo. It goes through my Office 365 environment.

The most valuable features are multifactor authentication and account creation for the Exchange environment in Office 365.

Bridging between on-premises and cloud services has the potential for improvement. For instance, it would be beneficial to be able to synchronize traditional directory schemas with Azure. I need to maintain an on-premises Active Directory server for certain required services. 

I have been using the product for over three years. 

Microsoft Entra ID Governance's scalability is high. 

The product's scalability is high. It's essential for supporting Apple devices and integrating with systems like Apple Business Manager or Apple School Manager. 

I never had any reason to reach out to the support. 

I use Google and Microsoft Entra ID Governance. I use Microsoft Entra ID Governance because I'm part of a school district. It integrates well with Azure and Integra, which certain systems need. Additionally, I use single sign-on from Google for other systems. Not everything works with Azure; some systems only work with Google. So, I have a triangular integration between my Active Directory, Google, and Azure environments, with Azure facilitating communication with Apple systems.

I rate the tool's deployment a nine out of ten. It was easy, especially since we had a direct plug-and-play setup on-premises. For deployment, all I needed was the licensing that I bought through Microsoft and my value-added reseller. Then, we just used the tool to migrate the emailboxes to Exchange Online. 

A Managed Service Provider helped us with the deployment. 

In the education sector where I work, the annual cost for my Google and Microsoft environments is approximately $35,000. This covers the needs of 3,400 students and 800 faculty and staff members.

The solution is part of my Microsoft Office 365 environment. I would recommend Microsoft Entra ID Governance for customers looking for a similar solution, but it depends on their needs. For example, it is a good choice if you're in an Apple environment and need to use Apple Business Manager or Apple School Manager. 

Additionally, it can be beneficial for a school district. However, your email system might be the driving factor if you're a business. Microsoft Entra ID Governance is a good fit if you use Exchange or Office 365 Exchange. However, it's worth considering other options if you primarily use Google for email and file sharing.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

As a security admin in Paraguay, I rely on Microsoft Entra ID Governance to handle frequent account compromises. It helps me manage access easily, set up access rules, and automate user access.

RBAC provided by Microsoft Entra ID Governance has significantly improved security and compliance posture. Companies that prioritize security segment their roles effectively, and utilizing RBAC helps enforce this. By assigning specific roles with limited access, it reduces the risk of unauthorized access and ensures compliance with security policies.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Entra ID Governance for identity management is multi-factor authentication. Through my experience supporting customers, I have found that many users compromise their security by not activating it. Enabling multi-factor authentication, especially in serious companies, significantly enhances security by adding an extra layer of protection.

One area for improvement in Microsoft Entra ID Governance could be providing more granular control over security policies. For example, the ability to enable or disable features like multi-factor authentication or default security policies on a per-user or per-application basis, rather than applying them organization-wide.

I have been working with Microsoft Entra ID Governance for about four months.

I would rate the stability of the product as a nine out of ten.

The product scales quite well. We have approximately 300 end users.

I would rate the tech support for Microsoft Entra ID Governance a six out of ten. They are fairly quick to respond, usually getting back to you within a day of requesting support. However, it can take a few days to receive a solution after the initial call.

Neutral

The initial setup of Microsoft Entra ID Governance is straightforward. It provides all the necessary information to set up your domain and users, making it easy to create user accounts once the domain is established. I would rate the easiness of the setup as a nine out of ten.

Deploying Microsoft Entra ID Governance in our company usually involves five to ten people for onboarding and setup. However, maintenance typically requires only two to three people, unless there is a major issue.

The standard license for Microsoft Entra ID Governance typically costs around $12.50 per month for individual users, with discounts available for bulk purchases. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance makes managing user accounts easier. I guide organizations to set up rules and settings smoothly, reducing the need for repetitive explanations. Once in place, issues from the same users or companies typically decrease because they understand and follow the rules.

In our company, Microsoft Entra ID Governance smoothly manages access requests. Users undergo multi-factor authentication, including SMS confirmation, ensuring security. We also implement zero-trust and network access authentication for extra protection. 

Integrating Microsoft Entra ID Governance with other systems in our IT environment has been effective overall. However, there have been barriers in some cases, particularly with older Paraguay systems. For example, when integrating with mailing systems or older tools, we sometimes need to disable default security policies or multi-factor authentication, which can compromise security.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Entra ID Governance a nine out of ten. While it can be complex for less experienced users, once you understand it, it offers comprehensive solutions that bring significant benefits to the table.

Customers are already integrating their on-premises identity solutions with Microsoft Office 365. As they transition to the cloud, they want to ensure seamless hybrid integrations between their on-premises identity infrastructure and Microsoft Azure Active Directory. Additionally, they seek to implement governance measures on top of their identity solutions to manage access and security.

While Microsoft's role management capability is strong within Azure or Microsoft technologies, it may present challenges for users outside these ecosystems. For instance, if a customer utilizes Entra without Office 365 and seeks to transition to AWS or Google Cloud, the management capabilities may not seamlessly extend to these platforms. The top three capabilities mentioned in such scenarios may not be fully applicable or transferable.

Access reviews are an essential feature of Entra Governance. Additionally, privileged identity management is one of its most valuable features. Just-in-time access, or Jet GIT, is integral to this system. Moreover, user behavior analytics stands out as one of its top features.

Microsoft has done a commendable job with RPAX. However, Microsoft should prioritize enhancing its ABAC (Attribute-Based Access Control) capabilities. Currently, Microsoft's ABAC offering falls behind AWS in comparison. 

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID Governance as an integrator for three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We mainly work with enterprise customers.

Support is satisfactory.

Positive

The initial setup is easy.  If I'm installing for a client with a 10,000 customer base, it'll take about one to one and a half months.

The deployment patch usually consists of two to three people. Currently, there's an initial one-time deployment. For Entra, the maintenance part requires three people. If you're following a 24/7 support model, you'll still need a minimum of three. 

The benefit is indeed cost savings. It addresses their identity management needs effectively. Many clients already utilize Microsoft products like Office 365, which includes applications like PowerPoint, making Entra a logical addition to their existing ecosystem. This bundling makes it a very cost-effective solution for most of our clients.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance is cheap, especially for organizations with a low customer base. There's room for improvement in its documentation. Despite my years of experience, I cannot confidently address customer queries regarding guests and standard users due to unclear documentation.

Microsoft Entra ID Governance streamlines compliance with regulatory guidelines set by the RBI. It automates governance processes, ensuring adherence to mandated requirements. This includes defining job roles and workflows, integrating with Defender capabilities, and simplifying operations. However, a significant challenge arises when users seek to implement Entra as their identity solution while hosting workloads on platforms like AWS or Google Cloud. In such cases, compatibility may be limited, potentially compromising functionality.

The reason to give Microsoft Entra ID Governance priority is if you are using Microsoft technologies. If your infrastructure is entirely based on Azure or on-premise using Microsoft Active Directory, then Entra ID Governance becomes highly relevant. However, if your identity (ID) setup deviates from Microsoft's ecosystem, the effectiveness of Entra ID Governance diminishes significantly due to limited compatibility and capabilities. Microsoft users prioritize Entra ID Governance for seamless integration and maximum capabilities within their Microsoft-centric environment.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.