Any on-premises solution will require some prerequisites to get it to a stage where we could work with it. The setup is a bit more complex as it needs to have a few extra steps before getting to the implementation phase. 

Actually what we're running right now was the result of a complete rebuild in 2011, for which I was a major part. Prior to that, we were running an older version.

It was complex because we wanted to migrate all of our data. It was a bit of a challenge to get everything moved from the old system to the new one. We did have problems outside of the scope of the software, but it was more of a business process issue. Just a week before we went live, our security manager over on the business side, decided he wanted to do an active directory account clean-up, which took us completely out of sync without data. Just before we went live, it took quite a bit to clean up, but it did make our go-live look bad.

The initial setup is a lot easier to use than Oracle. It is technical and designed for system administrators. We require three or four executives to maintain the solution for 10,000 users.

I was involved in the initial setup and it wasn't complex. The implementation after setup was difficult. The documentation in that area was lacking, but the implementation was as good as it's going to get.

Setup is still complex when you plug a solution in a huge environment. A number of days were necessary to adjust everything.

The initial setup is not complicated. It's easy, in my opinion. After that, you have to do some configuration and setup for specific use cases, and this could be a little bit complicated if these use cases are customizable. It depends on the use case. The basic use cases are not complicated; it's just the next-next-next configuration. But if you want to do some customization, this could be complicated.

The installation is easy, but system integration for specific clients is very complex because each client has their own use case. You have to really understand what a client needs in their environment to master this solution. In short, installation is very easy but customization is not. 

In most cases, deployment takes roughly two to five days.

The initial setup is not complex. You only need define the right architecture and work on it.

Some of the connectors are pretty flexible. It felt like there was a lack of understanding on the capabilities of the endpoints. This ended up being a point of contention. There was a lot of back and forth in discussions about how things should or should not work. That dragged out the project for longer than it should have taken.

Overall, the initial setup was pretty simple. I have not done it personally, however, from what I have seen, I believe it's easy.

We only need two people for deployment and maintenance. 

The initial basic configuration is simple, but deploying the solution in greater depth and integration with high implementation reach requires expertise and certain complexities.

It was straightforward. Even when you're installing dependent software, like a database or something else, I consider it it straightforward.

It was straightforward on the SiteMinder side. On the Identity Manager side, it was a little more complex because we had to maintain a certain legacy items. We have some authorization settings stored in databases that we need hook Identity Manager to and have it manage those. We had to create some custom code to do that. It wasn't too difficult.

I think the actual product itself is fairly simple and straightforward. The difficulty comes in trying to understand what is a paradigm for identity management in the context of this particular product.

The initial setup for Symantec Identity Governance and Administration was very easy. It took around thirty minutes to be fully deployed. Setting up the solution was quite simple, but configuring it was a little bit lengthy.

On a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five being the best, I would rate the setup for Symantec Identity Governance and Administration four out of five.

The initial setup is not that difficult. We deployed the components and deployed the agents. This is just the basic framework.  

Our deployment took seven months because the design phase is very complicated. We need to collect information for the access matrix, we need to validate, and we need to do some kind of cleansing. So, it is a very intensive task. Mainly it is the design which takes most of the time, not the basic deployment. The difficulty is in the business logic, the business rules, and the cleansing of users.  

Working with the system is an ongoing process. When users request a type of access, there are only two paths. One of them is to grant access and the other is to deny access. For the denial, we may have to go through a long approval process which requires some justification for the requested access.  

The implementation team that we use is divided between different roles. It is not a very big team but it represents different functions in the operation. There are the technical people, the people responsible for identity management, those responsible for manual processes, the people responsible for revision to the business logic, the people responsible for validating the access matrix, the risk evaluation people, the IT people, the operations group, the compliance people, and, of course, HR. So we are talking about a sustainable team of maybe 12 people involved in the implementation activity, but up to as many as 20 may be needed for approvals or other consultation. A lot of parts of the company are involved with the implementation process and defining business rules, all for different reasons and functions.  

The initial setup is very complex. In fact, it took a while to get through the entire setup and we’re even adding to it now. CA has even been on site to help us.

Since we are discussing a very vulnerable system which would actually be the front-end for our customers, at the end of the day. We had to take it really slow and we got the system up and running, co-existing with our old system. We did a lot of tests, we had, as I said before, a few customers on the system before we actually started to deploy. It took us about 8 months to get things up and running smoothly. Then we had the confidence to really migrate our customers to the new system.

Most of the complexities are because of the business itself and the complexities that they have within their current infrastructure. The complexities are not really coming from CA's product.

In my experience, the posture of the setup has a direct correlation to the use case mapped to the feature set and functionality. There are numerous ways to implement a solution, but the level of complexity stems from the ability to simplify the requirements and work with the business on compromises. All organizations have security and business policies that they mandate by or govern towards. As a result, the initial setup or configuration is a direct by-product of how the use case is socialized into the product. At times, some business processes should not be subjected to IDM at all. unless there are compromises to how the business flow is managed. Understanding this basic idea and product limitations go hand in hand.

In spite of the efforts that have been made to improve the initial setup process, and the inclusion of a separate version that comes with a pre-package model, I still find it to be rather complex. 

It was complex with lots of requirements.

Initial setup was complex due to multiple inter-dependencies and high diversity of infrastructure components.

The initial setup was IDM v8, but we could not really upgrade to v12. I don't remember on top of my head what were the technical reasons because the product has changed quite dramatically. It's a completely different architecture and everything, but the migrations we are doing now, from one version of 12 to another is quite straightforward.

Converting from our old system took a little bit of work. We had a lot of old database access accounts that we had to move over, again, 40,000 or 45,000 but once we took care of that it was pretty painless.

It was all done in-house, but again the technical support was there when required.

It's a very straightforward process, very easy to use.

I was involved in the installation and it was complex. We were coming from a very old version and we had to upgrade. There was a lot of data migration.

Initially it was a bit complicated as it was really something new in the market and the idea of identity management that works automatically and synchronizes with a HR system was not common. We were a pioneer. It was complicated to start these projects, the planning, architecture, and data mining that we had to do in the first step.

The initial set-up was standard.

With any identity management product, you’re going to have complexities, so the setup is not simple. It’s a complex infrastructure and implementation and it requires reasonable expertise from those handling the implementation.

Its latest version is very easy to set up. The deployment takes around one hour, and after that, you have to do some configurations. The duration for that depends on how many systems you have. It can take one or two months.

It was set up in 2005 prior to when I joined the company.

I was personally not involved in the initial setup. After it had been completely set-up, we took over the operations from another company. From what I have heard, it was quite straightforward.

I wasn't involved in the setup.

The upgrades were complex, like from R6 to R12. Sometimes the import/export process was not working properly, but, we just opened a case and they figured it out for us.

The initial setup can be both straightforward and complex. This is up to an organization's requirements of the CA Identity Manager solution.

I wasn’t involved in the initial setup process.

It was complex due to the vast number of identities in the organization.

Straightforward, as it was simple with few resources needed.

It was so complex. For us, it was a wholesale process change in our organization, not just the solution implementation, so it was lengthy. A lot of that time was spent internally going from one provisioning model to another. We had a lot of customization requests from CA who helped.

Initial Setup is considered straightforward due to its wizard based installation. However, it is complicated due to HA requirements.

The initial setup was easy. Sometimes upgrades are a little bit complex. There are many components where you have to apply a patch to each component of the solution. For the installation, I would say it's a little bit complex. It's a little bit complex to set up but when it's okay, it runs fine.

It was complex because many servers are needed to follow best practice. Many manual steps are time consuming. If you add the Governance component for full IAG, it will be even more complex, because it is not properly integrated with IdM but more a separate product.

The initial setup was very complex. The product is just basically a conglomerate of a bunch of other products that were bought and pieced together. So it is still my one main gripe of Identity Manager. It is too many moving pieces; too many parts that were kind of stuck together. It makes it very complex. 10 servers and 10 different apps running to make it happen, and it is only getting worse now that Identity Plural is on top, which is supposed to be making it better, but we will cross that bridge sometime next year.

Identity managment is a complex animal no matter what product you use.

It was a little complex.

Complex, documentation was inadequate as was professional services.

I think it depends on your background, but as soon as you understand the terminology it's not so complex.

The setup was easy because of the friendly product documentation and the community support.

It is straightforward if you read the product documentation and understand the architecture before your set it up.

Yes the setup is straightforward and it can be done quickly.

It was not complex. CA and a partner worked with us on the setup.

Quite straightforward.

Provided the requirements are set, the initial setup was straightforward. Subsequent functionality within CA IM is not appropriately documented creating issues.

The latest version is very simple to set up and install with a lot of wizards. It also comes with a new Virtual Appliance which can select the features and be ready to use.