Microsoft Identity Manager Reviews

The typical use case for Microsoft Identity Manager is to automate Active Directory, where it is responsible for onboarding new employees to on-premises AD or to the cloud based on certain criteria.

The best features of Microsoft Identity Manager are its 100% compatibility with Active Directory, the ability to customize IAM policies as required, and its simplicity in design.

Microsoft Identity Manager can be improved by integrating it with Entra ID as a SaaS application or by having a cloud-based connector, as it is currently limited to on-prem scenarios, and a combination of both would be a great solution compared to competitors such as SailPoint or One Identity Manager.

While the initial setup of Microsoft Identity Manager is not completely complex, migrating or upgrading to a new version can be complex and requires multiple backups to ensure it goes smoothly.

I have experience working with solutions such as Microsoft Identity Manager, where I have almost eight years of experience, One Identity Manager for almost one year, and Entra ID for four years.

I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager as a stable solution, about 80 to 85% stable, as not all conditions can be satisfied at all times, leading to some employee or user accounts experiencing deviations and syncing issues.

In terms of scalability, Microsoft Identity Manager allows management of up to 400,000 objects with a standard configuration, though above that, it becomes slower, with each sync cycle taking more time and requiring more resources, yet it remains manageable.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate technical support from Microsoft around 7.5 or 7 to 8, as it is important to get to the right engineer quickly, but the process sometimes involves multiple levels before reaching the best support.

The initial setup of Microsoft Identity Manager is not completely complex; while the first-time setup is easy, migrating or upgrading to a new version can be complex and requires multiple backups to ensure it goes smoothly.

Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Identity Manager, it has a couple of cloud connectors that can sync directly with the O365 admin center, which is good enough, but Entra ID enables role-based access by default without needing a different connector from on-prem.

The reporting and auditing features in Entra ID are better than in Microsoft Identity Manager because the latter requires additional components to be installed, and very few engineers know about reporting in Microsoft Identity Manager, making it easier in Entra ID.

I see that investing in Microsoft Identity Manager can be worthwhile, but it should be collaborative with Entra ID; on its own, Microsoft Identity Manager lacks some cloud features.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Identity Manager is used primarily in the retail business. The implementation is enterprise-level within a national company, specifically at JCPenney, which is a large organization.

Microsoft Identity Manager automates all identities and access on every target system efficiently and quickly. It is the optimal solution for work in the Identity and Access Management area.

The system retrieves data from authoritative data sources and pushes that data to targets. I have assessed the impact of the Microsoft Identity Manager synchronization capabilities on data consistency and have worked with other solutions such as Micro Focus and Aveksa. Although those vendors claim to be powerful and comprehensive, Microsoft Identity Manager proved to be much better for our needs. It is more efficient, much quicker, and does not cost as much.

Microsoft Identity Manager could be improved in several areas. The solution uses a batching process that executes at scheduled times, which differs from other vendor solutions. It is missing capabilities for real-time updates. Very often customers require real-time or almost real-time updates, and this feature is missing in Microsoft Identity Manager.

I have worked with Microsoft Identity Manager for approximately 20 years.

I would rate the customer service and support from Microsoft as ten on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best.

Positive

I have assessed the impact of the Microsoft Identity Manager synchronization capabilities on data consistency while working with other solutions including Micro Focus and Aveksa. Although those vendors claim to be powerful and comprehensive, Microsoft Identity Manager proved much better for our needs. It is more efficient, much quicker, and does not cost as much.

The main difference between Microsoft Identity Manager and Micro Focus is that Microsoft Identity Manager is much more efficient, while Micro Focus is very slow.

I do not have experience with Red Hat, Fortinet, or Cisco. I work with Information Technology solutions in general, specifically in the Identity and Access Management area. I have experience working with a Microsoft environment but do not have experience with CyberArk or Okta. I work with Privileged Access Management solutions and use Microsoft Identity Manager 2016. I have utilized the self-service identity management features, although not extensively. I am not familiar with Micro Focus eDiscovery, LoadRunner, Fortify, or Micro Focus Vertica. My overall rating for this review is nine out of ten.

We implement a zero trust network, so part of the identity is managed with Microsoft IAM.

The integration with other Microsoft ecosystems, such as Graph API, is really cool. These features have been impactful in improving our security and compliance.

Integration with third parties and enhanced policy management could be improved. The current policy management features are limited, and custom, flexible policies would be ideal. 

Additionally, broader integration capabilities with third-party tools would be beneficial.

I have about three to four years of experience working with Microsoft Identity Manager.

The stability of the solution is high, and I would rate it as an eight out of ten.

The scalability of the solution is good, and I would rate it as an eight out of ten.

The technical support is of good quality, and I would rate it as seven point five out of ten.

We previously used AWS IAM. We switched due to the seamless integration with Windows endpoints and our hybrid ADR.

The initial setup was easy and not difficult.

We implemented the solution ourselves.

We have not seen a clear return on investment. The comparison depends on use cases, as most of our resources are Windows-based.

The pricing of Microsoft Identity Manager is expensive.

It is important to base recommendations on requirements. If a Windows environment fits well, then Microsoft Identity Manager is definitely recommended. 

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Identity Manager serves as an identity platform for our employees and customers.

Microsoft Identity Manager is a solution that will be retiring soon. At the moment, our use cases are, for example, when one user logs in to our website. If some employees want to open any application in our corporate network, Microsoft Identity Manager is the platform that can authorize access to the application.

I think we have some features in the tool. My company is not certified when it comes to Microsoft Identity Manager. The tool's only feature that is generating value for us is the login process for our clients. When employees want to open an application, Microsoft Identity Manager has to verify the identity and then grant access to the application. I know Microsoft Identity Manager has a lot of features, but there are only specific capabilities of the tool we need.

If we don't use Microsoft Identity Manager for data masking, we can use some other tools, like IBM InfoSphere. The scope of Microsoft Identity Manager is limited to the identity part of our applications. Microsoft Identity Manager is an old technology, and Microsoft will discontinue it soon.

Microsoft Identity Manager is very complex compared with other platforms. For example, I know Microsoft Azure is working on Azure Identity. In the future, Microsoft Identity Manager will migrate to Azure Identity because Azure Identity is a software asset and is less complex.

The solution's technical support is bad, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Microsoft Identity Manager for four years.

If one is the most difficult and ten is the easiest, I rate the product's initial setup phase as a one out of ten.

The product's setup phase was difficult.

I did not experience any ROI using the tool.

The tool's price is low. I don't remember if we pay for licensing on a subscription basis. The tool's price is low for my company.

We are using SSPR, and we have integrated it with Azure Active Directory.

Considering that Microsoft will discontinue the support for the tool, I would not recommend it to others.

I rate the tool a six out of ten.

My primary use case is to manage identities and enforce policies and workflows to manage user profiles and provision them securely, as well as streamline that process.

The features of Microsoft Identity Manager that have been most impactful in improving security and compliance include the granular policies, report, and the ability to gain end-to-end visibility for each user. This includes individuals and their devices. It allows for an intimate understanding of users from an identity perspective.

Currently, there is no specific area that needs improvement as I am very happy with the program. I haven't explored it deeply enough to identify any areas for enhancement.

I have approximately two years of experience with Microsoft Identity Manager.

I believe the solution has high stability as it is a critical service, and we have never encountered any problems.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as ten out of ten.

I rate the technical support nine out of ten. Issues naturally arise, however, it is not a complaint.

Positive

Before Microsoft Identity Manager, I used the on-premise Akidiva Directory from Microsoft. It has been a successful product for us.

The initial setup was manageable. We have a partner who supports us, and they did not struggle with the setup. It is relatively straightforward to operate with a learning curve to understand its workings. Following the guides and available material helps ease the process.

Our deployment was done by a third-party partner.

The pricing area may need improvement. Microsoft's licenses are bundled, allowing access to multiple services, which is beneficial.

Based on my experience, I would recommend Microsoft Identity Manager to others anytime. 

I would rate the overall solution ten out of ten.

I'm an IT specialist working for the public sector. My job is to facilitate identity and access management for my employer.

Microsoft Identity Manager automates user lifecycle management. We ensure that end users have the correct program rights and access to specific rooms using chip cards with transparent technology. This facilitates access to both rooms and program rights in the building.

I like its ease of use. Moreover, AI is an important aspect, but it's more a future aspect. So currently, it doesn't play a role in our AI strategy.

The self-service password reset feature is a very important aspect because it reduces the workload of other employees, and it's a very interesting and often-used feature.

The schemas, the data model could be improved. It should be more flexible for our requirements.

The documentation could be better. 

I have some experience with this product but not extensive. It's a relatively new technology, so I have about two years of experience.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. It has been a stable product for me.

I would rate the scalability a two out of ten, it was not very good. 

There are 20 end users in my organization. The usage is about once a week. 

The customer service and support are not so good. Moreover, the documentation could be better.

Neutral

We used a homegrown solution, but now we switched to the newest solution from Microsoft.

We switched to Microsoft around 2018. We are a Microsoft customer with our operating system, email system, database system. So, it's one step further to also use this tool.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup as two out of ten, with ten being easy because the information and sources available on the Internet are not very good. Our organization primarily uses on-premises solutions.

We are a conservative organization, and timing is less important than quality. So, the deployment took several days.

Integration with other systems:

We have a complex structure. The first step is our Active Directory solution, and then we have connections with the mentioned Microsoft technologies to facilitate access to rooms and program rights. We use cards to facilitate this. When we have a new employee, the first step is to ensure they get a dataset in the Active Directory.

We used an external partner for the installation.

We have a standardized tool. Standardization is important because it requires less learning curve and cost, as we have employees who can handle this tool. This is a very important aspect for us, having a standardized tool. So, we use this tool. This is the most important aspect.

There are alternatives, but Microsoft is almost a monopolist with a strong market position. They can set prices, so you can argue that this is not the optimal solution for a customer. I would give the pricing a five out of ten. 

I would recommend it, with some restrictions, with some caveats.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

In our organization, we use Microsoft Identity Manager as part of our Microsoft setup. It is all about making life easier for our users. When they log in, they can access all their apps with a single sign-on. Our admins also get to control access levels easily. This works great with Microsoft services like email and applications, even if we are using Microsoft servers. While I haven't looked beyond Microsoft, within our setup, Microsoft Identity Manager is a fantastic tool for managing who can do what, and it is a big help to our team.

I appreciate how Microsoft keeps adding new features to Microsoft Identity Manager. It is not just about identity management; it is expanding into areas like zero trust and conditional access. This means we can create policies that require additional verification, even if you have the right username and password. It is a crucial feature for today's security needs, making it harder for unauthorized access, especially when compliance requirements are involved. Microsoft is doing a great job by continually enhancing the platform in this way.

I haven't identified any significant issues with Microsoft Identity Manager. It is constantly evolving, and Microsoft regularly introduces new features and improvements. It used to be known as Azure Active Directory, and now it is part of Microsoft InTouch, indicating its commitment to enhancing the platform. The continuous updates and changes are a positive sign, ensuring that the product remains robust and up-to-date. However, while it offers numerous features, not all of them are well-known or easily discoverable. Some valuable features might go unused because they are not well-documented or connected clearly in user guides. While the basic features are straightforward, more complex ones lack accessible documentation, making it challenging to understand their full potential. Improving the documentation and providing clearer guidance on how to connect different features would make it even better.

I have been using Microsoft Identity Manager for eight years.

I haven't had any issues with the stability of the product.

It is a quite scalable product.

I have had experience with Microsoft's technical support teams, and they have been highly responsive and cooperative. You can reach out for support either through a CSP partner or directly to Microsoft. They have a well-structured support system with first and second escalations, ensuring that issues are addressed effectively and promptly. I would rate the support as a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup for Microsoft Identity Manager is quite straightforward. It comes with a default configuration, and you can start using it right away. You don't have to implement anything from scratch. Instead, you can enhance it by defining new policies to meet your organization's specific needs. It is a user-friendly process, and you can get it up and running without a lot of complex implementation steps. Setting up Microsoft Identity Manager usually takes a few hours for the basics. However, the total time can vary a lot. If your company already has clear policies, it's quick. But if you need to create new policies, it can take longer. The time needed depends on how well your company's policies are defined and how fast you can integrate the solution with them.

Microsoft Identity Manager's pricing is typically included in their premium licenses. If you have a premium license, you should have access to the Identity Management features without additional charges. It is bundled with the overall suite of features and services available with the premium license, making it a cost-effective solution for identity management within the Microsoft ecosystem. It is not too expensive, but a decent value for the features and services it provides.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager as an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Identity Manager is used for complete user provisioning and life cycle management of users. It is also used for automating the active directory.

Microsoft Identity Manager is easy to configure. Microsoft Identity Manager's documentation is good, and its end-user portal is user-friendly.

It would be good if Microsoft Identity Manager Maybe could be integrated with Azure Active Directory directly and made as a cloud platform. Right now, Microsoft Identity Manager is just an on-premises application and can't be a cloud application. It can come as a SaaS (software as a service provider) solution.

I have been using Microsoft Identity Manager for eight years.

Around 40,000 users are being managed by Microsoft Identity Manager in our organization.

Microsoft Identity Manager has good customer support than other solutions like One Identity to your SailPoint. They respond within a day and try to help if they support the software version.

When comparing the cost, Microsoft Identity Manager is the best solution because it is free if you have an Azure P2 license.

The solution's from-scratch installation had to be done by myself.

Choosing to use Microsoft Identity Manager depends on each individual requirement.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.

Microsoft Identity Manager is used in everyday identity management workflows by many customers who prefer a local architecture to integrate it with other architectures. They also utilize the solution to implement test services or single sign-on solutions.

The most crucial feature of Microsoft Identity Manager is integration, especially with Office 365. A specific scenario where automation provided by the identity manager was crucial is when customers use hybrid clouds, with resources both locally and in the cloud. They require an easy identity solution across workspaces, local and cloud, integrating cloud identity with local identity sources, supporting single sign-on and authorizations, and ensuring security across applications. Microsoft Identity Manager integrates such local and cloud identity sources, supporting numerous applications.

Microsoft Identity Manager has shown a strong focus on cloud solutions, but it could improve its support for legacy products and on-premise infrastructure. Legacy applications or solutions are often not fully supported, which can be a limitation for customers with existing on-premise setups. The emphasis on cloud-based solutions is beneficial for modernization as it is crucial to address customers' needs relying on legacy systems. Microsoft should address the gap in support for legacy products to ensure a more comprehensive and inclusive approach.

I have been working with Microsoft Identity Manager for the past two years.

I would also rate it nine out of ten in terms of stability in terms of stability, as it is very stable.

I would rate its scalability a nine out of ten since it is very scalable.

Setting up Microsoft Identity Manager is straightforward, and I'd rate it a nine out of ten. Deployment typically takes a few hours.

Our customers have recorded a return on investment with Microsoft Identity Manager. They have observed notable improvements in their security posture while implementing Identity Manager.

The solution provides robust security protocols such as multifactor authentication, Directory apps, and delegated administration, enabling customers to operate in a more secure environment. These features have directly contributed to enhancing security and delivering benefits to customers who have invested in Microsoft Identity Manager.

My rating for the pricing of Microsoft Identity Manager is average, neither too expensive nor too cheap.

For those considering using Identity Manager, especially if they have Microsoft Infrastructure and need a cloud-based identity solution, I highly recommend using Azure's Identity Solutions.

I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager a nine out of ten.

Its interface and the fact that it's integrated with everything in the Microsoft ecosystem are the most valuable features. It integrates well with the operating systems, other apps, and servers, and it's easy to see exactly who's accessing what and so on.

The prices can always be improved, and the integration with the software from other vendors could use an improvement, especially if you are using something like Oracle for a database, SAP for ERP, or something like that.

Internally, we have been using this solution for about four years. We are using its latest version.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 9 out of 10 in terms of stability.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 10 out of 10 in terms of scalability. We have around 500 users.

I'd rate their support a 9 out of 10.

Positive

We've been using the previous versions of Microsoft Identity Manager before this. It was on-premises. So, we've had it implemented for some time, and then we upgraded it to the next version. Overall, we've had it for about 10 years.

I didn't participate in its implementation.

We noticed some ROI because the people in our IT department have a lot more time to do other things instead of constantly watching the infrastructure. If something is wrong, they get a notification, and they don't have to stay up 24/7 with their eyes on what's going on with the infrastructure. There is about 15% ROI.

The prices can always be improved. I'd rate it a 4 out of 10 in terms of pricing.

I'd recommend doing a proof of concept and watching out for the prerequisites and what it needs to function properly so that you don't start an implementation and find out that you need something else, such as SQL Server for a database or an analytics space. Read the requirements carefully and start with a proof of concept to see exactly how the people from the IT department are working with this solution and whether it would help them. That's because if they are not comfortable with the solution, they will use more time to understand it than to monitor the infrastructure.

Overall, I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager an 8 out of 10.