We performed a comparison between AuditBoard and IBM Blueworks Live based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, AuditBoard, Trend Micro and others in GRC."AuditBoard has several solutions for governance, internal audit, and other categories."
"The most significant feature of AuditBoard is its community tools. It provides an internal communication platform that enables users to communicate within the system rather than relying on external tools such as Outlook or Microsoft products. By communicating within the system, all interactions are centralized and accessible, promoting a streamlined workflow."
"The most valuable feature of AuditBoard is its ability to facilitate the editing of work papers in a seamless and efficient manner. This is achieved through a built-in tool that allows for real-time editing without the need for downloading the working paper. This feature has proven to be incredibly time-saving for me as it eliminates the step of having to download the file and make changes, instead providing an easy-to-access "edit work paper" option. Overall, this feature has greatly improved my experience with AuditBoard and has been a significant contributor to its success in my opinion."
"The most valuable feature is that everybody can use the same tool. You can give a person permission to use AuditBoard and define their access to the Audit Table. For example, we can allow external auditors or clients to review our completed tests. The clients are attached to specific tests that happen regularly, like inventory counts and asset counts. Debt compliance is only done once annually."
"The most valuable feature is the well-documented instruction."
"AuditBoard is very user-friendly compared to other audit management software I have used in the past."
"There are lots of features."
"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."
"Business users understand it really well, which means we can then help them automate their business processes."
"The business process discovery is excellent. The diagram or blueprinting functionality of the solution are very good. It's quite easy. You can link the sub-processes and get a big overview of the whole process then."
"In terms of the collaboration features, from the point of discovery, it was useful to go to load up the policies and the rule sets that the client had. And in terms of exploring options and being able to model a variety of different processes, that was incredibly useful as well."
"The stability is pretty good. It is highly available, which is key. You don't lose your work and can autosave."
"For me, what I find to be the most valuable is its simplicity and the association with Microsoft Office."
"This solution is good at utilizing standards rules for connectivity."
"The ease of documenting and digitizing the processes was valuable to us."
"The licenses are transferrable between different users."
"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."
"The layout for the end user could be improved."
"It is not easy to analyze the results of a survey as a whole."
"Everything is there, and I have no disadvantage to note as of now."
"AuditBoard has the potential for improvement in a few key areas. Firstly, I have experienced instances where the platform has experienced technical issues and ceased to function effectively. Additionally, the editing tools provided within the platform can be slow and laggy, particularly when trying to access and edit important documents. This can be a hindrance to my workflow and efficiency. To address these issues, they should begin by improving the speed and reliability of the platform, as well as enhancing the search engine to make it easier to find specific controls and documents within the platform."
"They should improve the solution's test sheets feature for ease of use."
"The initial setup is somewhat difficult because it has multiple pieces that need to be stitched together. You have to integrate it with the business unit you want to test if you want to go down from the corporate level to the operational level."
"A handful of things in the solution need to be improved. One of them is better communication of updates to the system or tool itself."
"The objects that the solution creates are not unique."
"We haven't yet been able to dabble in case management with Blueworks Live, as it is not yet offered with the product."
"We would like the ability to add additional custom colors. We would like to color additional items to add notes to the blueprint."
"I wish Blueworks Live had simulations built in, but it doesn't. It also lacks a feature of reporting; ad hoc, drag and drop reporting. A lot of senior people are always asking for reports, and there's no reporting feature within IBM Blueworks."
"Spaces are not well organized; space controls are lacking."
"IBM Blueworks is BPMN 2.0 compliant, but it does not adapt to the overarching BPMN 2.0 concepts."
"The initial setup is neither straightforward nor complex however you do need to know what you are doing."
"The solution is a very basic discovery product so it doesn't have that much modeling capability. This can be improved."
AuditBoard is ranked 2nd in GRC with 11 reviews while IBM Blueworks Live is ranked 12th in Business Process Design with 20 reviews. AuditBoard is rated 8.6, while IBM Blueworks Live is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AuditBoard writes "User-friendly, simple to implement, and has lots of features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Blueworks Live writes "An easily scalable and affordable solution that enables users to document and digitize processes with ease". AuditBoard is most compared with Workiva Wdesk, OneTrust GRC, RSA Archer, IBM OpenPages and LogicGate, whereas IBM Blueworks Live is most compared with Visio, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Lucidchart, ARIS Cloud and Camunda.
We monitor all GRC reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
