Archer was being used when I started at my company, but I think they were previously using some CA tool. We have been using RSA Archer and RSM, but we are finally migrating to ServiceNow. 

I'm also familiar with Workiva and Auditboard. They are a bit more modern. This product is more old-school. 

Generally client without GRC framework move to Archer to automate their processes.

Previously, I have used Aravo, and currently, I'm using Process Utility.

I previously worked on ITGC Controls in the IT sector conducting general control audits. I have performed other roles. We used to collect all the systems-related information showing that the server is updated correctly. We used to check database server-related information, so we'd verify that the daily backup is done. All the IT environments should have maintenance on policies ISO 7001, and I performed the general control audits.

I was using a related tool, but at the time, I was interested more in development, so that's why I have switched. Initially, it was a minor project that required significantly less personnel. RSA Archer is growing mature, so I just switched.

Previously, they were purely on Excel files and getting data from the applications inside Excel or Word format. I think this is the first solution they went to, and this is the best tool for GRC, governance, risk, and compliance. There are other tools but they would be confusing for the business, so Archer is the best right now.

I have used ServiceNow but nowhere near as extensively as I've used Archer. The problem with GRC ServiceNow is that it has limited features, which is why we switched to Archer. It has better features and functionalities.

I have only ever worked with RSA Archer. I have not worked with other GRC systems, but I have seen other companies switch from other platforms to RSA Archer because it better met their needs.

We did not use another solution prior to choosing this one. Everything was done using Microsoft Excel.

I have seen the deployment of the SAP-based audit management system in 2013 or 2014, which might have changed a lot over these years. From a user's point of view, RSA Archer has a better user interface. It is easier to use. SAP had a typical structure and user interface. It might not have been user-friendly for everyone. RSA Archer is more user-friendly. Its acceptability is much higher when you are deploying it in an organization.

We used SharePoint for a bit. We switched to Archer because the graph, user interface, and all that was better than SharePoint. I'm not too sure about the strategic decision because I wasn't with the organization back then, but I know that they wanted a centralized location for their governance, risk, and applications. 

Our clients migrated their work data from Archer to OpenPages for better performance and scalability.

We did not use a different solution prior to RSA Archer, which we have been with for a long time. 

Previously, they were storing the data in Excel sheets, but when they wanted to move to Archer, based on the requirements, I created the fields, and I created the workflow and access control for that.

I have worked on SAP ERP in my previous company. I started to work on Archer after I moved to this company.

A similar product that we used before RSA Archer was LDRPS (Living Disaster Recovery Planning System). We had to move from LDRPS to the RSA product because LDRPS went to the cloud. The security requirements of our management and of our customers are generally that they do not want to have very critical information on the cloud. In some cases, they can not have it there at all. We have to use a tool that is possible to install on-premises. When we were evaluating solutions, I was testing several of the products. I chose RSA Archer because it met this requirement and other needs we had for flexibility.  

I chose RSA Archer because I was tasked to find a tool that could implement business continuity planning. Archer can implement more processes in many ways, so it not difficult to implement anything from incident management to business continuity, to change management. Anything somebody asks me to do, they provide the requirements and it is really easy to implement it in this. On top of that, it is easy to customize.  

So this is the reason why we chose Archer. It is easy to implement, it is easy to change the workflow, and it is easy to customize the processes.  

When we started working with Archer, it was more or less the only product in the field that could do GRC automation. A few have been launched since then, but we've only ever worked with Archer.