We performed a comparison between IBM OpenPages and RSA Archer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two GRC solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product’s interface is very intuitive."
"The content, reporting, and workflow features stand out as the most valuable aspects."
"The ability to keep a record of internal incidents in the company, and also the monitoring of Key Indicators."
"It has various valuable features. For example, showing us if a control aligns with specific standards or frameworks helps us understand it better and verify its compliance."
"RSA is a very rich application. I like its adaptive suggestion, where based on your users and the class of data, it can actually recommend you the proper control to choose. For example, we have been using PCI DSS as an NIST. So based on application feedback, it will provide you with a suggestion on which control objective needs to be set. Based on that, you can make a decision—you don't need to take the suggestion, but you can customize that particular provided suggestion. RSA Archer's workflow is also good, in terms of process automation."
"With RSA Archer, an admin can set permissions for a normal user to go directly to the tool they need to input some data. Admins can then go through that and approve some requests. Also, they can log in based on these kinds of permissions, including ticketing, service patches, or upgrades."
"I like how Archer requires very little programming ability. A person with minimum coding experience can configure the necessary fields in Archer. It's more of a drag-and-drop solution."
"The Advance Workflow feature simplifies things."
"It is enterprise-wide accessible. So, it is very helpful for all the employees in our bank. They can log in and do their risk management activities. It has a few inbuilt modules that are helpful for doing risk management activities, such as issue management, risk identification, risk assessment, and policy exception management. It also has some inbuilt workflows inside these modules. They are also helpful."
"Flexible record permissions and data import features."
"The most valuable features are the advanced workflow and the dashboards. This tool can present data wonderfully to management, and it is easy for them to manage the risk plans."
"The solution must allow customization in reporting."
"I believe there's room for improvement in establishing connections with external information."
"IBM OpenPages needs improvement in its UI. Currently, it is difficult to see the relationships (associations/parents) between all items unless you click on the item itself."
"There is no inbuilt alert in Archer to let us know that a data feed has failed or did not run for different reasons. So, we don't even get to know that a feed has not run until somebody reports it to us. This has been a problem all the time. Data feeds have always been a big headache for us because there is no feature to let us know if a feed has not run or has failed. If Archer had a feature to send us an email notification when a feed has failed, it would've been very helpful. This is the reason why our users are slowly moving away to another platform. Some of the modules that I have been managing are being moved to ServiceNow. Next year, a lot of our modules will be moved from RSA Archer to ServiceNow, and the data feed issue has been one of the main reasons."
"RSA Archer might be a bit expensive for small companies because it's a vast tool."
"The design and advanced workflow need to be improved."
"Archer could be improved by having more customization. I'm not sure if the backend processes have API calls and those kinds of seamless integrations, but from the front, some of the solutions are very out-of-the-box. It's not customizable, so that could be a little problematic since you have to use their features. In terms of the backend structure, I'm not too sure because I'm not a developer—I was an end user and product owner of Archer—and I don't quite know the backend and developmental features. But since it's an out-of-the-box solution, sometimes customization was challenging and support was a little problematic because we had to reach out to them all the time."
"It would be useful for customers if COBIT 2019 could be translated into different languages."
"There should be a way to export and get data from the system in PDF or PowerPoint presentation format. This would be a great addition."
"The first improvement I would suggest for RSA Archer is a better search feature. The search criteria needs to be improved. Sometimes I do a search and the search doesn't return the exact item I'm looking for. RSA Archer could also be improved by being more user-friendly. Maybe I have been using a limited version of RSA Archer, but I'm not sure whether it has ESG, environmental and social governance. In the next couple of years, ESG is the next feature that will be integrated into GRC tools. I would recommend RSA Archer adds ESG."
"When we have to do formulas or some other type of calculation in Archer, it sometimes doesn't work correctly. The fields don't display right, and we have to contact RSA Archer support to fix things. I think the calculation components are a bit complicated."
IBM OpenPages is ranked 8th in GRC with 5 reviews while RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews. IBM OpenPages is rated 6.6, while RSA Archer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM OpenPages writes "Enables us to manage global workflow and users' relationships with the links". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". IBM OpenPages is most compared with MetricStream, OneTrust GRC, SAP BusinessObjects GRC, AuditBoard and SAS Enterprise GRC, whereas RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, MetricStream, Workiva Wdesk, AuditBoard and Snow Governance & Risk. See our IBM OpenPages vs. RSA Archer report.
See our list of best GRC vendors and best IT Governance vendors.
We monitor all GRC 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.