We performed a comparison between AuditBoard and IBM OpenPages 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."I find the most significant elements of this solution are the out-of-the-box reporting, the ease of workflow, workflow management, and the ease of managing our audit process."
"The most valuable feature of AuditBoard is its ability to facilitate the editing of work papers in a seamless and efficient manner. This is achieved through a built-in tool that allows for real-time editing without the need for downloading the working paper. This feature has proven to be incredibly time-saving for me as it eliminates the step of having to download the file and make changes, instead providing an easy-to-access "edit work paper" option. Overall, this feature has greatly improved my experience with AuditBoard and has been a significant contributor to its success in my opinion."
"In AuditBoard, there are all the audit steps, including documentation, archiving, and tracking the progress of audits."
"There are lots of features."
"AuditBoard has several solutions for governance, internal audit, and other categories."
"AuditBoard is very user-friendly compared to other audit management software I have used in the past."
"The most significant feature of AuditBoard is its community tools. It provides an internal communication platform that enables users to communicate within the system rather than relying on external tools such as Outlook or Microsoft products. By communicating within the system, all interactions are centralized and accessible, promoting a streamlined workflow."
"The most valuable feature is the well-documented instruction."
"The ability to keep a record of internal incidents in the company, and also the monitoring of Key Indicators."
"The content, reporting, and workflow features stand out as the most valuable aspects."
"The product’s interface is very intuitive."
"Everything is there, and I have no disadvantage to note as of now."
"The layout for the end user could be improved."
"A handful of things in the solution need to be improved. One of them is better communication of updates to the system or tool itself."
"It is not easy to analyze the results of a survey as a whole."
"After sending out a request to my network for documents, it would be great to have a receipt that shows who received the request and who did not."
"AuditBoard has the potential for improvement in a few key areas. Firstly, I have experienced instances where the platform has experienced technical issues and ceased to function effectively. Additionally, the editing tools provided within the platform can be slow and laggy, particularly when trying to access and edit important documents. This can be a hindrance to my workflow and efficiency. To address these issues, they should begin by improving the speed and reliability of the platform, as well as enhancing the search engine to make it easier to find specific controls and documents within the platform."
"AuditBoard could benefit from the addition of video capabilities, although it is not a necessity. Small companies that cannot afford licenses for Microsoft Teams or Zoom would benefit greatly from this feature, as it would enhance the communication process."
"Some of that flexibility could be enhanced. When comparing Archer and TeamMate+, there is a little more open-ended in terms of certain of our audit processes and procedures. And there is significantly greater freedom in creating ad hoc audit processes and procedures, whereas AuditBoard is a little more limiting in this regard."
"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."
"The solution must allow customization in reporting."
AuditBoard is ranked 2nd in GRC with 11 reviews while IBM OpenPages is ranked 8th in GRC with 5 reviews. AuditBoard is rated 8.6, while IBM OpenPages is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of AuditBoard writes "User-friendly, simple to implement, and has lots of features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM OpenPages writes "Enables us to manage global workflow and users' relationships with the links". AuditBoard is most compared with Workiva Wdesk, OneTrust GRC, RSA Archer and LogicGate, whereas IBM OpenPages is most compared with RSA Archer, MetricStream, OneTrust GRC, SAP BusinessObjects GRC and SAS Enterprise GRC. See our AuditBoard vs. IBM OpenPages report.
See our list of best GRC 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.