We performed a comparison between One Identity Manager and RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What I like most is that we can always find a solution, and we can also find the cause when something goes wrong. I like that the most because everything is in one way or another traceable. That is what I like most. I like its reliability."
"The key benefit of Omada Identity is maintaining complete control."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"User-friendly solution."
"Surveying is a valuable feature because it allows us to import data and see who has access to what data, for example."
"The support for the validity of the resources is valuable. The tool allows resource assignments within a validity period so that the managers do not have to remember to revoke the access once the work is done."
"Its best feature is definitely the process design. It is quite easy and straightforward to design a process."
"Omada's most valuable aspect is its usability."
"The IT shop is a great tool that allows a simple interface for users to see their access, be able to request additional access, and view the workflow approval process to understand where their request is and what any hold-ups may be."
"The most valuable features include the automated attestations or recertification... The time that people have to focus on their real jobs and not spend it doing recertifications is huge."
"The solution is a typical, conventional IGA but the tool itself offers many options for customization."
"There are a lot of valuable features, including connectors, attestations, and workflow."
"The solution is flexible because you can realize the customer needs. Therefore, it is easy to upgrade specialized things. It provides the flexibly, so you can implement customers' use cases."
"We no longer keep users who shouldn't exist."
"For the recertification and segregation of duties, it's easier to know all the information about our employees. If we need to delete some information, we can do it from a central point, then it can be deleted on all our searches. This is very good for GDPR."
"One Identity Manager offers several features that I found advantageous compared to other tools."
"Roles, connectors for provisioning and re-accreditation or reviews help greatly to govern user access."
"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."
"The data collection is excellent and easy to do. It does not require a lot of configuration nor does it require rules to be written like other competitors do."
"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."
"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."
"When the re-certification process is launched that makes Omada very slow. There are performance issues in the current version."
"I would like more training. As someone who is new to this world, I don't feel that the courses Omada provides are good enough. They should also improve the documentation. It is difficult to learn how to use the solution by yourself"
"Improved traceability would be helpful for administrators. For example, let's say a user's permission is being revoked. We can only see the system that has carried out a particular action but not what triggered it. If an event definition or something has changed in the criteria for the permission being removed or something like that, we don't have immediate access to that information. It takes a little detective work."
"If you're running Omada on a cloud service, you may have some issues deploying the newest release. Sometimes, the latest release doesn't adapt to the processes we have already installed. Identity Access Management is a critical system for our organization, and we need to ensure that everyone has the same access as they did before the release."
"If you find an error and you need it fixed, you have to upgrade. It's not like they say, "Okay, we'll fix this problem for you." You have to upgrade. The last time we upgraded, because there was an error in a previous version, we had to pay 150,000 Danish Krone (about $24,000 at the time of this review) to upgrade our systems... That means that we have to pay to get errors fixed that Omada has made in programming the system. I hope they change this way of looking at things."
"Omada could communicate better with us about the product roadmap. We haven't gotten any updates about it. The user interface is often a bit difficult to understand. It isn't optimized for small screens, so it doesn't display all of the information clearly, so users need to scroll a lot."
"We are trying to use Omada's standards and to adapt our processes. But we have had some trouble with the bad documentation. This is something that they could improve on. It has not been possible for us to analyze some of the problems so far, based on the documentation. We always need consultants. The documentation should include some implementation hints and some guidelines for implementing the processes."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"One of the things we would like is the ability to have more than one system role manager. That would be nice. For example, when people are on vacation, sometimes it gets a little hard to administrate system roles."
"[Regarding] their upgrades, we're going to 8.12 right now and everything is running very smoothly but this is actually the first upgrade that has gone off well. Even the other "dots" have taken us six months or longer to get through QA testing."
"The initial setup was quite complex because you run into some existing policies that the company already had. There was some trouble with some inconsequential policies."
"Improvements in documentation would be beneficial."
"The solution should come up with a lighter version so people can buy different versions."
"There is a small area inside of the administrator's GUI that could be a little bit more organized."
"More integration with SAP and with the internet of things would be good. We also have system devices that we could manage as identities, so that would be a feature to add."
"The philosophy behind One Identity Manager has always been that there's not one way of working and that you can set it up according to your own identity and access management philosophy, but what would make it better is by shortening the setup time and the learning curve time. If the team could create some best practices with a wizard to set the solution up within companies, that would be a killer feature and would help make identity access management more approachable. That would also help companies that don't have the resources or a dedicated team to set up One Identity Manager. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is the addition of just released application governance parts. That would sound promising. It would also be interesting if the team sets up best practice startup wizards, so you could set up One Identity Manager according to selectable best practice wizards instead of setting it up completely by yourself."
"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."
"Every connector that you have in the product needs to be custom-built, so there are not a lot of standard connectors available in the product, because of which there are a lot of hidden consultancy costs."
"There are scalability issues. This product does not scale very well. It is not a good product for load balancing / active–active architecture."
"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."
"This product is missing a lot of features which other competitors are providing. One of the key features that are missing right now is risk scoring. Additionally, there is not much scope for customization - everything is hard-coded and predefined, so it does not allow the developers to make many modifications."
"Technical support in Pakistan can be improved."
"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."
More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →
One Identity Manager is ranked 3rd in Identity Management (IM) with 77 reviews while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is ranked 23rd in Identity Management (IM) with 9 reviews. One Identity Manager is rated 8.0, while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of One Identity Manager writes "The JML is customizable but the support team isn't strong". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle writes "Lacking customization, poor support, but useful auditing". One Identity Manager is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Oracle Identity Governance, EVOLVEUM midPoint, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Ping Identity Platform, whereas RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud and Saviynt. See our One Identity Manager vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.
