I have not used the solution. I am a system integrator who assists with platform selection and implementation.
The majority of the individuals we assist on the platform or through selections are searching for SOX assistance, internal audit, of course, as well as basic risk management.
AuditBoard standardized our control processes, and our control policies to make the organization more efficient in managing Audits, Risk, and Compliance concerns.
All of the components are included in the platform. It gives us visibility into who we are auditing, as well as a better understanding of the process concerns and the best method to address them.
Also, if we have a lot of findings, why do we have these findings? Is it a training issue or anything else?
It allows us better insights into how the organization is functioning.
And then relative to the findings, it ensures when an organization has odd findings, whether minor or significant, we can track those through to a conclusion or correction or just decide not a big enough issue that we're going to do anything.
I find the most significant elements of this solution are the out-of-the-box reporting, the ease of workflow, workflow management, and the ease of managing our audit process.
While AuditBoard is very powerful and very strong, it is a little bit limiting.
It is limited by the fact that it is very structured. For example, I am unable to deviate sufficiently from the audit process.
I can't institute a lot of my own pieces. I have to use their standard out-of-the-box process, which is quite inconvenient. Understandable, however, still somewhat frustrating in terms of how the process works.
When trying to integrate plugins, not necessarily modules, but processes and procedures. We have unique business elements, and we find different ways to audit it and how it works, but it's limiting from that standpoint.
Some of that flexibility could be enhanced. When comparing Archer and TeamMate+, there is a little more open-ended in terms of certain of our audit processes and procedures. And there is significantly greater freedom in creating ad hoc audit processes and procedures, whereas AuditBoard is a little more limiting in this regard.
I have been acquainted with it when it was SOXHUB before it was AuditBoard.
I don't recall the version numbers, but we are up-to-date on the latest versions.
Because they are all intermingled among all the instruments we use. I never recall the exact version number. It's simply too difficult. They change so frequently.
AuditBoard is extremely stale. I would rate the stability of AuditBoard an eight out of ten.
There are different elements of scalability. I think scalability in terms of volume of users, volumes of data, it's very scalable, it is unlimited.
AuditBoard is very scalable.
If however, you are looking for scalability around the complexity and sophistication of your internal audit process, it is not as scalable, it becomes a little bit more limiting.
A corporation like ExxonMobil, Citi Group, and General Electric, large companies like that, it is not an audit tool that would fit well into those organizations, simply because they are larger, more complicated, and have too many moving pieces. That aspect of scalability is not ideal for an AuditBoard.
I have been in contact with technical support, not as much with the ongoing technical support, but certainly around the initial rollout and use of it.
Technical support is fine, it's great. It is as good as all the others. It is on par with its competitors, or better, they are fine, more than adequate.
I would rate the technical support a seven, or an eight out of ten.
Along with AuditBoard, I am familiar with TeamMate+, Workiva, and Archer, all of which are part of the four pillars of the internal audit space.
We have integrated internal audit tools such as Archer, TeamMate+, and Workiva, to mention a few. There are others as well. They all, to some extent, depend on your internal audit process and how it integrates with other risk and compliance initiatives inside your organization.
It is very simple to integrate. Some of this is because it works well for smaller, more basic groups, and it's incredibly simple to set up and get started. And part of it is due to the fact that it is more out-of-the-box in the process.
It allows rapid acceleration from an immature audit process to a more mature audit process. However, if you are a large organization, AuditBoard is not going to fit because it is too limiting in what you can change around the audit processes and procedures.
It is deployed within the AuditBoard cloud which is secure and structured. They have all the SOC2 and all the securities. You still need to add elements of your own security and your own identity depending on how you want to connect to it.
It is no different than all the other cloud-based solutions like Workday, ServiceNow, Salesforce, et cetera. From a security standpoint, it is quite robust.
Pricing is variable, like with any technology, and is determined by how hard you wish to negotiate. You can get to a price you're willing to pay if you're willing to negotiate aggressively.
It's more about the strength of your procurement cycle.
Which is no different than dealing with any other software platform.
In terms of extra costs I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there aren't a lot of gotcha surprises with them, none that come to mind.
I believe you should consider your audit processes, audit procedures, and where you want to take your internal audit program to see if AuditBoard is a good fit in terms of the complexity and sophistication of your audit processes and procedures.
Aside from that, I believe it's quite straightforward and simple to use. It's less about what you are doing now in your internal audit program and more about where your business is going and what you might require in the future.
I would rate it a six out of ten. It's a great solution for what it does.
It just depends on what you are trying to achieve and a lot of that is understanding what you are trying to achieve to get to that level of maturity of your program.
