The UI doesn’t enhance the user experience. I do not know if the issue is with the product or how it was implemented.

It is time-consuming to troubleshoot issues. Fetching data and transforming it to another system could be easier. There could be more customization options as customers have different environments and requirements. We need to go through other channels every time. It would save us a lot of time if more options were included. Apart from that, the documentation needs improvement as well.

Both SailPoint IdentityNow and Saviynt have some bugs, but SailPoint is considered more mature with fewer bugs due to its longer establishment in the market since around 2005. SailPoint had its share of bugs in the early days, but they have resolved them over time, resulting in a stable product. Saviynt, on the other hand, was launched around 2013 or 2014 and is actively working to improve its product. Despite having some bugs, Saviynt is making progress and aims to build a stable product, but it is not there yet.

The customer support and implementation services need to be improved.

According to feedback I've received, some users prefer SailPoint over Saviynt in real complex environments. SailPoint has its provisioning platform. Complex integrations may pose challenges in scenarios like a large bank with thousands of users, making SailPoint a preferred choice for some.

UI and support could be improved. The frequent updates and version changes can be disruptive for large organizations. Not every month, a large organization can go with the changes. Saviynt needs to consider this carefully. 

Additionally, documentation needs improvement, and a dedicated technical support team would be beneficial for resolving issues with the vendor.

The tool is difficult to migrate. 

We have around 60,000 employees. There are a lot of tasks being created and interactions between different applications. When the number of requests is very high, there is a lag and it takes time for the data to refresh. We also sometimes have performance issues when the solution fails to process the data between two different applications. Customization needs to occur so that the data between two different applications will flow smoothly but here are times when our scheduled jobs get stuck. I think that performance, in terms of customization available, and product functionality including the UI could be improved. 

I know they're implementing the PAM solution but I'm not sure how it's going to work. There's a lot there and I'm waiting to see how it holds up because the product is basically identity management. As they move into a PAM tool, it will be interesting to see how they implement it and how it will perform.

An area for improvement in Saviynt is that there's a limitation on the number of logs you can get from the past twenty-four hours. For example, if the data is huge, the tool can only give you a maximum of one hundred logs. You can't get any further than that. In the next version of Saviynt, however, you can get more logs and you'll see them inside the log rotation. For example, when you're trying to search inside the log, you can select a date range, and then you can search for a particular log. We haven't used that new log rotation feature yet, but it's included in the next release of Saviynt.

Another area for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't have a server monitoring feature, so if your server has a high load, it should give you a warning. You're supposed to get an alert similar to what's being done in WebLogic. In WebLogic, we had a separate facility, but in Saviynt, that feature's missing.

Sometimes, we do face some issues with the certification, as it's a long certification. For example, if you're launching all the certifications at once, that particular job will have an issue, but it won't affect user access. In terms of jobs, Saviynt doesn't have the facility to run many jobs on a particular server. If they had that facility, that will be super awesome.

One feature we'd like to see in Saviynt in its next release is the log rotation. With a third-party tool such as Splunk, you can get these logs and data from one year, so if Saviynt can add that same feature, that will be awesome. Having the capability to access logs that are a week or a month old would be great. Currently, the tool offers limited logs, so it's a bit difficult for us to debug. For example, even though we are having the same issue, that issue might not replicate now. We need more logs and data for debugging purposes.

Another feature we'd like added to the tool is the job feature that would allow us to utilize the job services even if we have more users because currently, it will stop other jobs which had already been scheduled if we reach the limit. Saviynt needs to have the facility to run the job from the server, from the backend. It would be very good to have that in the next release.

Improving the certification process is also another feature we'd like to see in the tool.

The custom application integration is a little complex, and this tool doesn't provide so many plugins or additional applications.

The biggest drawback is that for every change you want to make, you have to go back to them and ask for it. There haven’t got a tool to make modifications. Ideally, we would like to be able to make changes from our side.

Saviynt is a very new tool, which makes it difficult to find good people with knowledge about implementing and using it. I think that in four to five years, there will be lots of people with experience in the area.

In the future, I would like to see extra certificates included.

The product is complicated to scale compared to SailPoint. It runs on a native cloud platform and is not multi-tenant. This particular area needs improvement.

It should support more customizations. In SailPoint, we can do many customizations, but we are not able to do that in Saviynt. For workflows and other things, we can only use what is already in place. Saviynt has a lot of scope for improvement on the customization part.

As one of the leading IGA (Identity Governance & Administration) products and because of how I see this is the tool, I have to wonder how a client can fully maximize the capabilities of Saviynt. Surely the client needs to understand the tool to some extent. I think it is important that Saviynt services agents help to empower their clients to use their tools in a better way that is not being promoted at this time.  

One thing — and it could be just a problem in the APEC area — it that there is a lack of resources for independent learning. I have to spend quite a bit of time in the Freshdesk area to study in order to understand a feature, what other people are saying about it, et cetera. I find that I can not really get to understand the features that I am exploring quickly enough and in enough depth. The company I am working for is doing a project with Saviynt. My role is project/BAU (Business as Usual). Once everything is deployed in a proper way, I will be the person running it as a BAU resource.  

For an example of the learning that is absent, one thing I wonder about is the campaign module. Part of a campaign is to determine a risk score. The risk score is to be determined by the role as far as the entitlement for that role. I was hoping to have some kind of Saviynt-as-a-Service provide best practice governance where they could advise the client on how the risk score can be implemented in the tool. It is not obvious, and they do not provide that guidance.  

A tool like this can work for the client only if they have that standard governance in place. If not, they will not be able to leverage the experts in the field while working with so many clients. Saviynt has to work for their clients and so does the competition, like SailPoint. These users have different tools to do similar things and they will have a lot of exposure to different use cases. But still, there will be some common ground that should be addressed as standards. Some of those governance questions become very important in order to stay within an expected standard. If Saviynt can provide a framework for working with these standards with their tool, I think that would be quite helpful.  

Because different people are working together with clients in a company and using different tools, when we are in that situation, people using different tools have to speak the same language. Assuring that product users follow some best practice recommendations can help with that. In turn, we can uplift our standards and policies and strategies to align better with other people doing IGA.  

It is not really the tool itself, but the way it is introduced to the user or used by the user that is my issue with the product.  

It would be good if there were particular functionalities on some connectors. The stability of the connection also needs to be improved. There should be more capability on the rest API in the next release.

It would be nice if managing exceptions was easier. 

The configuration process at the beginning can be difficult, depending on the complexity of the company.

Because the application is hosted on AWS cloud, there is some dependency and that affects our bottom line. A couple of times we've had to stop everything for two or three days. That issue should be solved because when you are live and working on production, having downtime means losing business. Things can also just slow down while we're using the application and although it's not downtime, it can kill a lot of production hours. 

I think their interface is one clear area of needed improvement. Also, Saviynt cannot customize based on customer needs. The interface could also be more intuitive to the user.

In terms of improvement, it's really just a matter of them getting more mature. It's a relatively new solution and they probably need to streamline a few of the processes as they mature. But there are not too many problems.