Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management Reviews

Automating retention and deletion across our Microsoft 365 environment is my main use case for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. At Microsoft scale, Exchange, SharePoint, OneDrive, and Teams cannot be managed for data lifecycle manually. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management lets us define retention policies centrally and enforce them automatically across everything.

When I open Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management, I typically head straight to the compliance portal to check policy health and ensure retention labels are being applied as expected while checking for any gaps in coverage. I also manage disposition reviews. When content hits the end of its retention period, it gets flagged for review before deletion, and I work through those with our legal team on a regular cadence. I use the audit logs to pull compliance evidence when we have audit requests. Instead of manually hunting for proof that something was retained and disposed of correctly, I can generate a report in minutes.

The deep native integration with Microsoft 365 is what ultimately made me decide on Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management over Enterprise Vault and OpenText Content Manager. Auto-apply retention labels using machine learning is the specific integration with Microsoft 365 that made it the deciding factor for me over Enterprise Vault or OpenText. Manually labeling content at our data volumes is not realistic. The automated classification based on sensitive information types and trainable classifiers is what makes the program actually scale. That feature gets used constantly.

We went from inconsistent ad-hoc retention practices to a consistent, automated, documented program across the whole organization with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. That shift from a compliance audit perspective is enormous.

Better coverage outside Microsoft 365 is a feature I wish Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management had that it does not offer today.

If I could change one thing about Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management, I would simplify the policy and label interaction model. The flexibility is powerful, but the complexity is a barrier. A simplified mode for organizations that do not need the full depth of configurations would lower the barrier to entry and get more organizations to a good baseline faster. Currently, you either go deep or you risk getting it wrong.

I have about two and a half years of hands-on experience with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management.

We were using a combination of manual processes and basic Exchange retention policies that were not consistently applied before Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management.

The initial setup took longer than we expected. The initial deployment of basic retention policies took a few weeks, but getting the full program correct, understanding the interaction between policies and labels, configuring auto-apply classifiers, and getting legal sign-off on retention schedules took closer to four months. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is not a turn-it-on-and-go product.

For the people managing it, training was absolutely necessary. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is powerful, but it has concepts that take time to understand. The interaction between policies and labels, precedence rules when multiple policies apply, and event-based retention all required training. We conducted internal knowledge sharing sessions and leaned heavily on Microsoft Learn documentation. End users do not really interact with it directly, which helped adoption. The policies work in the background.

After we started enforcing deletion on content past its retention period, we recovered significant Exchange and SharePoint storage in the first year. The time our legal and compliance teams spend responding to audit requests dropped by approximately 60 percent because they can pull a Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management report instead of manually hunting for evidence.

We evaluated Veritas Enterprise Vault and OpenText Content Manager alongside Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. Both have long track records in information management.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management implementation is very much a team-wide effort. The policies apply organization-wide across all Microsoft 365 users. The management side, configuring policies, reviewing dispositions, and pulling audit reports, is a small team of compliance and IT people. However, the impact touches every employee.

On the policy side, adoption has been organization-wide. The retention policies are applied to everyone whether they know it or not, which is the point. On the admin side, we have a small group of power users who manage configurations and dispositions and a broader group of compliance people who consume the reports and audit outputs. The power users know it deeply, and the broader group uses it for specific tasks.

Event-based retention for things such as contract expiry or employee departure is something we configured but have not fully operationalized yet as a feature that came up during implementation.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management has changed how compliance and IT work together significantly.

The initial policy design phase has been the biggest friction point with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. Getting retention policies right requires understanding significant nuance. Understanding how policies and labels interact, precedence when multiple policies apply to the same content, and the difference between retain and delete versus retain only versus delete only are all critical considerations.

My advice for someone considering Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management who has a similar workflow to mine would be to start with a data inventory before you touch the product. Know what data you have, where it lives, and what your retention obligations actually are. Jumping into configuration without that foundation leads to gaps that are painful to fix later.

The licensing angle is worth emphasizing to anyone evaluating Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management. If you are already on Microsoft 365 E5, this capability is sitting there waiting to be activated at no additional cost. I would rate this solution a 9 out of 10.

I am a customer and user of the tools.

We are a big shop, and both the companies I work for are Microsoft Office 365 customers with over eighty thousand seats. Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management helps govern and protect the data across the Office 365 estate, both on-premise and cloud, as we have a multi-cloud environment. We use Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management as a SaaS service to protect the data across the organization.

We use it to scan our documents, classify them, and map these data across our estate, such as document repository estates including OneDrive and SharePoint, both on-premise and online. It provides a view on our SQL databases, AWS, and the file system. Currently, it is mostly for OneDrive, SharePoint on-premise, and SharePoint online in terms of data discovery, providing a searchable catalog where users can search and understand the data assets based on business and technical data classifications, such as internal and public documents or labeling.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management can be used, but currently nineteen percent of the estate consists of Windows desktops or notebooks. OneDrive and SharePoint data are accessible via both Android and Windows devices. However, our end-user devices are mostly Windows desktops, with a mobile component that can be iOS or Android.

It is used in production; all the data I'm talking about is in production data.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is used on the Microsoft Purview portal for data management. The solution helps govern and protect the data across the Office 365 estate, both on-premise and cloud, in our multi-cloud environment.

The solution can be effectively used across various devices, including Windows desktops and notebooks. OneDrive and SharePoint data are accessible via both Android and Windows devices, with support for iOS devices as part of the mobile component.

One of the requirements is to have data leak policies and data access policies. This is very critical to enforce data governance standards, which relate to data classification, access control, data protection, and retention. It covers the entire lifecycle, helping us to protect, detect, and classify the documents.

Challenges are mostly related to the security products onboarded into the bank; they have challenges in terms of those products complying with the internal standards. Sometimes, we cannot just use the DLP across the state. For example, using Microsoft products has been easy to adopt, such as OneDrive and SharePoint on-premise, but it becomes a challenge when it comes to AWS, as data also exists in S3 buckets. Testing is still ongoing, but it will eventually be done.

The time it takes to scan is one issue; when we raise high-volume issues and tickets related to scanning failures, it relates to permission errors, which are technical challenges. These take time because we have high volume tickets in terms of connectivity, scanning failures, and related matters. There are also frequent change requests, especially regarding scoping or rescoping due to complexities, creating several challenges.

In both organizations I work with, there are gaps, and there is no enterprise-wide data classification available. However, there are pockets of implementations for various products. Some agencies are using it, but otherwise, there's no product existing across the enterprise.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is definitely a good solution, but there is significant room for improvement from a product perspective. Reporting is another area that needs improvement.

I have worked with the solution for almost three years now.

The system is stable; I haven't encountered any worldwide stability issues unlike other office products. I see no issues with the Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management portal aside from technical challenges.

The scalability depends on certain organizational security policies that the Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management portal may not currently address. We are working with Microsoft on this.

Microsoft is generally responsive, but because these are all SaaS products, requests for new features may not happen quickly. I would rate it around seven on a scale of one to ten.

Positive

Because I am just a technical manager leading the team, I adhere to a nondisclosure policy due to my work with government and banks. My overall rating for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is six out of ten.

My main use case for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is identifying the core capabilities across Microsoft 365 workloads such as Exchange, SharePoint, OneDrive, Teams, and Viva Engage. I am primarily working on identifying and regular control and enabling exceptions across specific documents and email labels that can be applied. Further inspections and integration can be done on adaptive protections for the insider risk scenario. I am working on data loss prevention and preventing data breaches across SharePoint and OneDrive.

The primary use case for Coveo in our organization is its cloud-based analytics and machine learning services that continuously analyze user behavior patterns to understand which results and content lead to the best outcomes, enhancing our SEO while providing better visibility and accessibility of data sets.

In extending our use cases for Coveo, it offers intelligent enterprise search capabilities, improving search relevance across website portals and internal networks, as well as promoting content that historically leads to better user outcomes. This assists in IT knowledge-based searches, employee self-service queries, and addressing customer FAQs.

My main use case for HPE Apollo Systems is to use it primarily for data storage as a storage server.

HPE Apollo Systems is a high-density, workload-optimized server that we use for data-intensive and compute-intensive workloads, focusing on maximizing storage and compute while minimizing risk space.

Additionally, we have worked on big data analytics and data lakes, as it is designed to manage and analyze large and rapidly growing data sets. It is ideal for Hadoop and Spark workloads, and is also utilized for AI and machine learning workloads as well as optional GPU explorations.

The IFS Cloud platform has positively impacted our organization, improving efficiency substantially from a business standpoint and making operations very reliable and smooth.

The best features Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management offers for us include good features enabled by default and configurations. I generally work on user content sensitive information detections, zero user dependency, consistent enforcement, and defensible compliance. The second-best feature is security, as well as some legal teams that can work in identifying and deleting high-risk scores. It can also function as a record management and undefined policies management tool. From a cybersecurity perspective, it is a really good solution for reducing data sprawl, minimizing over-retentions, improving legal defensibility, and aligning with Zero Trust.

The best features the IFS Cloud platform offers include excellent service, fast response rates, and affordable pricing, with customers praising the platform for professional support and the ability to provide specific pricing tailored to business needs.

Coveo's best features include its machine learning and AI integration, automatic relevance tuning based on user behavior, and behavior-driven analysis that helps improve data visibility and the effectiveness of search queries.

The HPE Apollo System best supports large and rapidly growing data sets while providing features for managing data storage efficiently and offering high performance as well as advanced infrastructure integration.

The best features of HPE Apollo Systems include its design for data storage, ultra-defense architecture for managing large volumes, flexible storage options supporting SAS, SATA, and NVMe interfaces, and workload-optimized design specifically for data storage centers.

There is no specific improvement I would suggest for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management, but I think if they can work on policy design and usability, adding more granular control for the organization regarding controlling the movement of data outside would definitely improve the solution. For example, there was one external recipient who was unable to download attachments from emails or reply to emails due to the granularity of controls in Microsoft Purview. This was because of the sensitivity label application and confidentiality restrictions. If the support or development team could quickly identify those policies, it would definitely enhance the solution further.

I believe there are multiple ways the IFS Cloud platform could be improved. One recommendation is to develop it into a decision support platform, not just another control. If IFS can become a decision support platform with stronger integration into the cloud security stack, it can certainly improve. There is currently a gap with the IFS platform operating partly isolated from certain cloud solutions like identity management systems. Improvements in identity access from Azure AD and other platforms are essential, as is better data lifecycle management and retention awareness to reduce high-severity alerts without business context.

Coveo is already advanced in utilizing user behavior patterns, but more transparency in machine learning decisions and clearer user-friendly explanations for recommendations could enhance its functionality further.

I have been familiar with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management for more than five years.

I have been familiar with HPE Apollo Systems for more than three years.

I have been familiar with the IFS Cloud Platform for more than two years.

I have been familiar with Coveo for more than two years.

I think the majority of what we do with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is to preserve the data across inactive employees, inactive mailboxes, mailbox archiving, and PST for some specific data, which is very important.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management has positively impacted our organization by enabling us to identify compromises across business users' mailboxes and ensuring data loss prevention at the enterprise level. It quickly identifies data theft or confidential information being sent externally, can create keywords across Microsoft Purview, and can provide sensitivity levels, thereby improving overall business functionality and increasing our analysts' efforts to identify all threats associated with data lifecycle management through OneDrive, SharePoint, Teams, Viva Engage, and Exchange, allowing us to implement various retention policies.

I would rate Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management a nine out of ten because of how data is processed through the Microsoft Purview platform with granular controls and how easy it is for data lifecycle management across SharePoint, OneDrive, and Exchange. The rule creation, better visibility into the cloud platform, data transparency, and data leakage protections are all significant features that protect users and close compliance gaps, making it helpful for incident management, security incidents, insider risk alerts, and automated preservation.

I would advise anyone considering Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management to definitely move forward with this solution because it is a feature-rich offering from Microsoft that provides organizations with wider visibility of policy configurations and management across data transfers and availability, alongside licensing requirements needed for the Microsoft Purview portal, which helps grow the business and ensure better visibility in compliance and threat protection.

I would rate the IFS Cloud platform a nine because of its fast response, affordable pricing, and strong customer service, which makes it a reliable choice for businesses looking for comprehensive cloud solutions.

For anyone considering the IFS Cloud platform, I would definitely advise them to proceed without hesitation, as the pay-as-you-go model offers significant benefits for businesses of all sizes, allowing them to pay per service requirement with no hidden security costs on data confidentiality.

HPE Apollo Systems has positively impacted our organization by improving business operations by eighty percent, saving time, improving efficiency, and facilitating the management of large data sets. Its architecture allows easy management in terms of disaster recovery and offers wide features and flexibility in storage options.

There is not much that can be improved with HPE Apollo Systems as it is already a clear enterprise-oriented solution that effectively supports massive data growth, featuring better density than traditional servers and being well-equipped for data-centric workloads.

I would give HPE Apollo Systems a perfect score of ten because of its ability to manage large and rapidly growing data sets efficiently, along with its superior features for handling data-centric workloads.

For any business considering HPE Apollo Systems, I would advise them to move forward since it ensures data security and expands data capabilities across the business, providing strong features such as storage density and AI acceleration for scalability.

I would rate Coveo a nine out of ten due to its fast deployment and time value in a low-touch environment, leveraging machine learning and AI to provide superior search results based on user behavior patterns.

Any business considering Coveo should definitely proceed with it as it is an advanced platform that utilizes machine learning effectively, processing data requests efficiently with minimal time investment and high accuracy. My overall rating for this review is nine out of ten.

My major use case for Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is for the classification of data.

The features I use most frequently are discovery and labeling. I utilize data lineage insights, but that is with another team. The impact of Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management on my unified data catalog has improved a lot. The improvements I see are in the lineage, the discovery, and the labeling. The DLP component has also improved. It is good for data management. In Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management, improved information security metrics include helping us in discovery and labeling of data to create DLP rules around that.

I think labeling could use a lot more AI assistance. AI implementation into labeling would be beneficial.

I have been dealing with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management for about two years.

The solution is stable, and I do not remember experiencing any glitches or latency.

I would say the solution is easily scalable.

I think the technical support from Microsoft is good.

Positive

I have worked with a product from another vendor called Forcepoint for data management. I see some big differences comparing Microsoft with Forcepoint. I find Microsoft more convenient and more user-friendly. Microsoft is more user-friendly in terms of the UI and the way the workflows and everything are designed.

I think the installation of Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is pretty straightforward.

In relation to the research I did in the past, I read information about Cisco Duo, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto, Ivanti, and Microsoft, and I do remember that I reviewed many products. I manage these products myself and have experience and a relation to them. I work with all of these products. I have been dealing with Ivanti Neurons for MDM for almost two years, and now I am not using it. I stopped using it two years back. Today, I manage Microsoft InTune, although I am not managing it myself but there is another team that is managing that. I currently look into other products from Microsoft, like Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management and Defender. We already have an E5 license with Microsoft, so if you want feedback or anything, you can just send me the questionnaire on my email, and I will fill that out. I do not work with Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management Privileged Access Management, PAM. I work with Data Lifecycle Management and compliance management. I am currently managing it. I am just a customer. I prefer to keep my company name confidential. I would like to remain anonymous for both my name and my company name. I do not have a couple of more minutes to discuss some other Microsoft stack products. I would like to know if I will get special access for PeerSpot. I gave this review a rating of 10.

We use Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management to ensure all of our data across the enterprise is governed.

The integration across Azure is straightforward.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management has been a game-changer for our data governance. We now have clear visibility into our entire information estate, allowing us to pinpoint data location and implement effective classification.

Even though real-time compliance isn't a current need, Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management offers that capability for future requirements.

Purview Data Lifecycle Management has reduced our time to action – since we previously lacked such a tool, it's effectively cut our response time in half.

Purview Data Lifecycle Management has saved us one working day per month.

The UI is the most valuable feature.

Microsoft's Purview Data Lifecycle Management preview features can be unreliable, hindering their usefulness. More thorough testing before release would improve user experience and ensure previews showcase the intended functionality.

I have been using Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management for two years.

Purview Data Lifecycle Management is extremely stable.

Purview Data Lifecycle Management scales to manage a vast number of databases. While we currently only have 120 connected, it can handle organizations with tens of thousands.

The technical support responds within one hour.

Positive

Setting up Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management itself is easy - it can be done in around five minutes. However, integrating it with all our enterprise data sources can take a couple of months, because we had to update all of our data to permit Purview to read from it.

We opted for Purview Data Lifecycle Management due to its significant cost advantage over competitors. At a 95 percent price reduction, it was a clear winner. The service operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, charging an extra one cent per field of metadata scanned in our data.

I would rate Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management eight out of ten.

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management is scanning 120 of our databases and data warehouses. So it is deeply integrated with our data estate.

I recommend Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management to others.

I suggest using the self-hosted integration runtime because it makes networking better and more secure.