No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AuditBoard vs Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AuditBoard
Ranking in GRC
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (8th)
Interfacing Technologies En...
Ranking in GRC
44th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (139th), Business Process Management (BPM) (60th), Quality Management Software (48th), Document Management Software (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the GRC category, the mindshare of AuditBoard is 2.8%, down from 6.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is 1.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AuditBoard2.8%
Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center1.0%
Other96.2%
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2562750 - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Streamlined workflow and enhanced simplicity with an easy setup
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look at risks and controls The collaboration within my team had not yet significantly changed since…
SantoshKulkarni1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
A Robust Solution with Enhanced Automation and Process Improvement Identification Capabilities
I recommend that users invest more time in the initial setup of the process architecture within the tool. It is crucial to spend time designing how the process architecture works as it significantly impacts how the tool behaves. This upfront investment can prevent the need for extensive reworking later on.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"AuditBoard is very user-friendly compared to other audit management software I have used in the past."
"In AuditBoard, there are all the audit steps, including documentation, archiving, and tracking the progress of audits."
"There are lots of features."
"Considering the solution's return on investment, it has been extremely helpful since we were doing a lot of documentation. Previously, in our company, we were using an Excel sheet which made things quite messy."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One notable software-related benefit from a user perspective is our improved ability to identify opportunities for automation and process enhancement just by gaining a clearer view of the processes. There are two valuable aspects. First, setting up the process architecture is commendable. Second, not having to maintain different versions of processes is a notable benefit. The solution is stable. The support team is responsive."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated manner in which all the capabilities of the Enterprise Process Center platform work together and make it easier to complete the documentation of processes."
 

Cons

"They should improve the solution's test sheets feature for ease of use."
"Everything is there, and I have no disadvantage to note as of now."
"After sending out a request to my network for documents, it would be great to have a receipt that shows who received the request and who did not."
"It is not easy to analyze the results of a survey as a whole."
"The layout for the end user could be improved."
"AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust."
"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."
"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."
"As with all such platforms, Enterprise Process Center is a complex tool and there are many capabilities and features that take time to learn."
"However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights into process functionality. Additionally, there's always room for enhancement in the user interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I highly recommend this tool as the price is reasonable. However, consistent pricing is important, and having a loyalty program that rewards long-term customers with lower prices would be a great addition."
"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."
"My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to understand what options you believe you are going to want to implement and rollout in the first three to five years, but spend the most time understanding what the set-up costs and pricing will be in the first two or maybe three."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
Construction Company
25%
Computer Software Company
20%
Healthcare Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust. For IBM OpenPages, the reporting can be more robust as the summary report on each of the modu...
What is your primary use case for AuditBoard?
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look ...
What advice do you have for others considering AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is recommended for smaller companies, particularly for its risk assessment module, which is simple and easy to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Enterprise Process Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Pepsi-Cola Manufacturing International Ltd., Pfizer Deutschland GmbH, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Bayer S.p.A., KPMG, Royal Australian Air, Orange
Find out what your peers are saying about AuditBoard vs. Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.