Ideagen Risk Management vs. OneTrust GRC & Security Assurance Cloud

Pentana is great for monitoring PIs and risks. We find it less helpful for monitoring projects (with the Actions module); it isn't quite flexible enough for our needs, though the support team have been very helpful in adding custom fields for us.

OneTrust provides a repeatable and defined process for vendor assessments but should be adapted to your organization. OneTrust functions well for a centralized document repository. The pricing of modules and what modules are required for workflows to function fully should be better defined. Automated assessments can wind up in spam filters and should be communicated outside of the platform prior to sending to the vendor.

Incentivized

• Pentana is excellent for monitoring, recording and reporting on PIs. Very easy to use the PI module.
• Pentana is excellent for monitoring risks at various levels (service, strategic etc.). Risks are displayed very clearly in a tree structure and the module is relatively easy to use.

• Module wise implementation.
• Very reasonable price structure.
• Easy and speedy to implement.
• Product roadmap.

• Pentana could improve the free Documents module that comes with Pentana Risk. At the moment documents have to be linked to an action in order to display query results (such as how many documents are due for review) - this can be confusing for users who don't understand why there is an action linked. There is also no easy way for users to see the documents that are assigned to them.
• We would like to use the Actions module fully in order to monitor our corporate projects, but it a bit confusing for users and not very flexible when a project doesn't mirror Pentana's way of monitoring actions.

• Documentation chasing for assessments is not as automated or hands-off as demos made it seem.
• Getting custom risk matrix set up required professional onboarding.
• Platform is less than intuitive.
• Pricing is module dependent and demos do not highlight which module is included in which workflow.

Incentivized

Some modules are more user-friendly than others. It's sometimes not obvious where to click to update the fields (or even that field titles can be clicked on). We have written 'Howdys' to help users. There can also seem to be a lot of steps/clicks to updating risks and actions. The Reports module on Pentana classic is certainly not user-friendly, particularly the Report Layout and Charts modules - we were told these would be integrated into the web version but this hasn't happened yet.

The support team are excellent and always answer queries promptly. They are very helpful.

We selected Pentana because our neighbouring authorities are users and had spoken highly of the product and given us demonstrations; some of our staff were also familiar with Pentana when it was called Covalent. It seemed to be the best product on the market for monitoring risks, PIs and projects.

During the assessment, we found that OneTrust is easier to use, set up, and administer. it has a quick ROI and value for business. The OneTrust product support and roadmap are far more competitive in comparison to TrustArc. OneTrust is specialized in GRC including Data Privacy and Cookie compliance, where Archer is good in Enterprise Risk management.

• Pentana Risk has allowed my team to focus on other areas of work whereas before we would be manually chasing for updates on PIs and risk. Pentana Risk does the chasing for us!
• We are able to produce reports for audit purposes very easily, rather than sending spreadsheets which is what we used to do.
• New managers can easily inherit risks, projects and PIs and see all of this on a custom portal, saving them time when they start.

• More uniform vendor assessments.
• Defensible numeric metrics reflecting risk.
• Centralized document repository for audit proofs.

Incentivized