Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) 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

Diligent One Platform (form...
Ranking in GRC
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
IT Governance (8th), IT Vendor Risk Management (24th)
Interfacing Technologies En...
Ranking in GRC
21st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (29th), Business Process Management (BPM) (35th), Quality Management Software (18th), Document Management Software (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the GRC category, the mindshare of Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) is 2.8%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center is 0.2%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

WW
Good automation and analytics, but is costly
The report model was our main concern. I believe currently the solution uses a third party for the reporting. As part of a consulting firm, one of the challenges we face is the difficulty in producing reports that meet the expectations of our clients and customers. It would be beneficial if the focus could be shifted toward improving the reporting aspect. The impact report is a crucial aspect, as we only have one opportunity to create it. Galvanize HighBond can improve by generating more impact reports post-project, and allowing access to the reports using a web version, which would greatly benefit us. The cost of the solution is expensive and needs improvement.
SantoshKulkarni1 - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"The most valuable feature is automation."
"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

"The cost of the solution is expensive and needs improvement."
"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 give the cost of the solution a six out of ten."
"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.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
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 processe...
What needs improvement with Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
While we have yet to explore the tool's capabilities fully, I can't think of any immediate drawbacks. However, on the process mining side, there's potential for improvement to gain deeper insights ...
What is your primary use case for Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center?
We use the solution for finance processes, specifically for accounts payable and accounts receivable.
 

Also Known As

Rsam GRC, HighBond, HighBond by Galvanize , Diligent GRC Platform
Enterprise Process Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CNA Insurance
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 Diligent One Platform (formerly Highbond) vs. Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.