The reporting and auditing features in Entra ID are better than in Microsoft Identity Manager because the latter requires additional components to be installed, and very few engineers know about reporting in Microsoft Identity Manager, making it easier in Entra ID. I see that investing in Microsoft Identity Manager can be worthwhile, but it should be collaborative with Entra ID; on its own, Microsoft Identity Manager lacks some cloud features. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.
It is important to base recommendations on requirements. If a Windows environment fits well, then Microsoft Identity Manager is definitely recommended. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Senior Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Jul 31, 2024
We are using SSPR, and we have integrated it with Azure Active Directory. Considering that Microsoft will discontinue the support for the tool, I would not recommend it to others. I rate the tool a six out of ten.
For those considering using Identity Manager, especially if they have Microsoft Infrastructure and need a cloud-based identity solution, I highly recommend using Azure's Identity Solutions. I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager a nine out of ten.
Learn what your peers think about Microsoft Identity Manager. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2025.
The solution's from-scratch installation had to be done by myself. Choosing to use Microsoft Identity Manager depends on each individual requirement. Overall, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. However, my experience is based on the planning stage because we haven't had the opportunity to implement it.
Microsoft Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
MSP
Feb 3, 2023
I'd recommend doing a proof of concept and watching out for the prerequisites and what it needs to function properly so that you don't start an implementation and find out that you need something else, such as SQL Server for a database or an analytics space. Read the requirements carefully and start with a proof of concept to see exactly how the people from the IT department are working with this solution and whether it would help them. That's because if they are not comfortable with the solution, they will use more time to understand it than to monitor the infrastructure. Overall, I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager an 8 out of 10.
Business Development Manager - Identity Management and Security at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Mar 15, 2022
It is easy to implement and integrate, but I would advise keeping it in the scope of only synchronization and not governance. That's because it lacks governance features. I would rate it a seven out of 10.
IT Specialist at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Oct 13, 2019
Over the years Microsoft has improved a lot. We don't have problems like we used to have in previous versions. There's still more room for improvement, however. They have begun listening to their customers, and they are bringing out features that customers are asking for and if I can get that from an OEM it gives me the assurance that everyone is being taken care of. I would recommend the solution, however if a person is considering implementing it, they need to have a plan. Otherwise, they might start off and only after realize that there are options that weren't implemented well. It's good to always have a plan of what you want to implement something new. Review it and let your team query it, so you know exactly what you are deploying. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.
My advice to someone implementing this solution would be to implement the on-premise identity and access management solution if they've got more than 1,000 identities on-premise. I strongly recommend implementing an on-premise environment in that case, or if they are a financial institution, such as a bank or underwriting institution. They also should implement the hybrid deployment, which means there would be an integration of the identity management solution sitting on-premises and a combination of the Azure Active Directory as an identity and access management in the cloud-based environment. For small businesses, I would recommend that they implement the cloud-based identity and access management solution, leveraging the provided Azure Active Directory by Microsoft. I'd give Microsoft Identity Manager a rating of nine out of ten. I'm giving it a nine because I'm looking at the hybrid scenario and more strongly on the cloud-based identity and access management solution for Microsoft. It has a lot of features; it has all the bells and whistles of identity and access management, such as adaptive MFA, intelligent graph security API, and being powered by Microsoft Graph API. Also, the multi-factor authentication is easy to set up, with a single button. For Windows environments, you just install one application API, called AD Connect, to sync all the on-premises identity to the Microsoft Azure Active Directory. The reason why I'm not giving it a ten is that they still need to upgrade their solution to enable a new feature to accommodate Linux and Unix identity directory specifically to integrate with Microsoft Azure Active Directory. It seems as if the company does not want to provide that capability because now they are focusing on growing their own Microsoft Azure cloud, which means they are forcing all those customers that are running the Linux or Unix environment to come and migrate or lift and shift all their Linux or Unix workloads into Microsoft Azure. I think they are focusing on growing their own environment, which is why they are not providing this capability.
Vice President, IT Infrastructure & Information Security at KAMCO
Real User
May 16, 2019
I strongly recommend this solution. It encompasses the cloud, on-premises applications, mobility, and on-premises users. The modern enterprise encrypted license is one of the best solutions to go for because of the mobility and security for the workforce, as well as for the company. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Principal Security Advisory Consultant and Delivery Lead at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
Apr 11, 2019
The out of the box connectors need to be increased. We can integrate with multiple applications to connect together through using Microsoft Identity Manager. I would grade Microsoft Identity Manager at 7 or 8 out of 10. I wouldn't give it a ten because of the lack of out of box connectors. I don't see any other drawback in the product.
Microsoft Identity Manager (MIM) builds on the identity and access management capabilities of Forefront Identity Manager. MIM helps you manage the users, credentials, policies, and access within your organization. Additionally, MIM adds a hybrid experience, privileged access management capabilities, and support for new platforms.
The reporting and auditing features in Entra ID are better than in Microsoft Identity Manager because the latter requires additional components to be installed, and very few engineers know about reporting in Microsoft Identity Manager, making it easier in Entra ID. I see that investing in Microsoft Identity Manager can be worthwhile, but it should be collaborative with Entra ID; on its own, Microsoft Identity Manager lacks some cloud features. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.
It is important to base recommendations on requirements. If a Windows environment fits well, then Microsoft Identity Manager is definitely recommended. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Based on my experience, I would recommend Microsoft Identity Manager to others anytime. I would rate the overall solution ten out of ten.
We are using SSPR, and we have integrated it with Azure Active Directory. Considering that Microsoft will discontinue the support for the tool, I would not recommend it to others. I rate the tool a six out of ten.
For those considering using Identity Manager, especially if they have Microsoft Infrastructure and need a cloud-based identity solution, I highly recommend using Azure's Identity Solutions. I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager a nine out of ten.
I recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Overall, I would rate Microsoft Identity Manager as an eight out of ten.
I rate Microsoft Identity Manager a six out of ten.
Microsoft Identity Manager has good functionality, but its pricing is too high. I rate it an eight out of ten.
The solution's from-scratch installation had to be done by myself. Choosing to use Microsoft Identity Manager depends on each individual requirement. Overall, I rate Microsoft Identity Manager an eight out of ten.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. However, my experience is based on the planning stage because we haven't had the opportunity to implement it.
I'd recommend doing a proof of concept and watching out for the prerequisites and what it needs to function properly so that you don't start an implementation and find out that you need something else, such as SQL Server for a database or an analytics space. Read the requirements carefully and start with a proof of concept to see exactly how the people from the IT department are working with this solution and whether it would help them. That's because if they are not comfortable with the solution, they will use more time to understand it than to monitor the infrastructure. Overall, I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager an 8 out of 10.
I would give MIM a rating of ten out of ten.
It is easy to implement and integrate, but I would advise keeping it in the scope of only synchronization and not governance. That's because it lacks governance features. I would rate it a seven out of 10.
I would rate this solution a five out of 10.
I would say that it's the best solution on the market and I would go ahead with it. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Over the years Microsoft has improved a lot. We don't have problems like we used to have in previous versions. There's still more room for improvement, however. They have begun listening to their customers, and they are bringing out features that customers are asking for and if I can get that from an OEM it gives me the assurance that everyone is being taken care of. I would recommend the solution, however if a person is considering implementing it, they need to have a plan. Otherwise, they might start off and only after realize that there are options that weren't implemented well. It's good to always have a plan of what you want to implement something new. Review it and let your team query it, so you know exactly what you are deploying. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.
My advice to someone implementing this solution would be to implement the on-premise identity and access management solution if they've got more than 1,000 identities on-premise. I strongly recommend implementing an on-premise environment in that case, or if they are a financial institution, such as a bank or underwriting institution. They also should implement the hybrid deployment, which means there would be an integration of the identity management solution sitting on-premises and a combination of the Azure Active Directory as an identity and access management in the cloud-based environment. For small businesses, I would recommend that they implement the cloud-based identity and access management solution, leveraging the provided Azure Active Directory by Microsoft. I'd give Microsoft Identity Manager a rating of nine out of ten. I'm giving it a nine because I'm looking at the hybrid scenario and more strongly on the cloud-based identity and access management solution for Microsoft. It has a lot of features; it has all the bells and whistles of identity and access management, such as adaptive MFA, intelligent graph security API, and being powered by Microsoft Graph API. Also, the multi-factor authentication is easy to set up, with a single button. For Windows environments, you just install one application API, called AD Connect, to sync all the on-premises identity to the Microsoft Azure Active Directory. The reason why I'm not giving it a ten is that they still need to upgrade their solution to enable a new feature to accommodate Linux and Unix identity directory specifically to integrate with Microsoft Azure Active Directory. It seems as if the company does not want to provide that capability because now they are focusing on growing their own Microsoft Azure cloud, which means they are forcing all those customers that are running the Linux or Unix environment to come and migrate or lift and shift all their Linux or Unix workloads into Microsoft Azure. I think they are focusing on growing their own environment, which is why they are not providing this capability.
I strongly recommend this solution. It encompasses the cloud, on-premises applications, mobility, and on-premises users. The modern enterprise encrypted license is one of the best solutions to go for because of the mobility and security for the workforce, as well as for the company. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
I would recommend this product to a colleague at another company. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
The out of the box connectors need to be increased. We can integrate with multiple applications to connect together through using Microsoft Identity Manager. I would grade Microsoft Identity Manager at 7 or 8 out of 10. I wouldn't give it a ten because of the lack of out of box connectors. I don't see any other drawback in the product.