RSA Archer is definitely easy to scale. It's not complex to add applications to our portfolio. For example, we can use one set of controls for one application, and then we can easily map another application with that same set of controls. 

We have a huge organization, so RSA Archer is available for higher management. In our portfolio, there are about 26 users. We don't have plans to increase our usage of RSA Archer because we are migrating to ServiceNow. 

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. If project pipelines increase, we would like to expand it to a few specific users.

Its scalability is of medium complexity. It is not very easy to scale, but it is also not too difficult.

We have been using it very extensively. We have 300,000 employees, and everyone has access to the Archer platform. Some of the modules are open to everyone by default. For example, policy exception management is open to all, and everybody can request an exception to a company policy. Some of the modules are more restrictive, and access to them is given based on the user roles.

Many of our functions are dependent on the RSA platform, but people are slowly moving to other platforms. In the next two or three years, I don't know how extensively it'll be used, but over the last five years, it has been used a lot.

The solution is easy to scale. Just add a server, then store the tool in it and then load balance it. It's not difficult. We have around 2,000 regular users and we're likely to increase that.

The solution is very scalable. 

There are around 300 end users using this solution in our company. We all access it to manage compliance through the system.

RSA Archer is easy to scale, it's not complex.

It is a requirement to maintain RSA Archer. Our team even provides the managed services to the client, as well.

Some of my clients are moving their GRC solution from other platforms to RSA Archer because of scalability.

This solution is scalable.

After deployment, some customers complain that the database must be constantly updated every time they add users, and the update process takes them a long time. For example, one of my clients has 60,000 to 70,000 users in their environment. It takes them three to four days to rebuild the search index on the database side.

RSA Archer is scalable.

It's really scalable because we have options to import users or applications automatically; there are options to import a large number of users. Last year, we had a merging of three banks, and the users of the other two banks were brought into our Archer. They had more then, about 1,000 to 1,500 users, and that was done within a month. We were able to integrate all applications and users. Scalability won't be an issue.

In terms of scalability, that's a problem. When you want it to scale, it costs you resources, just like that other product I hate, Splunk. I love the products, but not the resources they eat. It is expensive that way.

Its scalability is very good. Because of the way they've set up their licensing, it's now very easy to scale, especially if you're using SaaS.

We have over 60,000 users across all departments. Some users just go to check the status. I would think it is being used extensively.

The product’s scalability is pretty good.

The solution is easy and simple to scale.

It is very easy to scale. Right now, we have three teams using the solution. It's about 15 to 20 people.

We are responsible for maintenance. There's a team of 20 to 25 people dedicated to Archer. Once it goes to the cloud, then we won't be responsible for maintenance.

We have plans to increase usage in the future. We are talking to the different departments of the company. Archer is not like a business. It doesn't go outside the business because it's really a security tool, and it's just used by the security departments and different departments who are involved with security. It just involves the company. We're trying to leverage it to different departments and we'll see what happens.

The solution is very scalable. The design approaches Archer provides are very easy to change and scale. In an agile project, it's very easy to handle or develop with most of the configurations based on drag and drop as per the document framework.

Scalability is there but it's not easy. You need to be familiar with the system, which can take a couple of months. Once there's familiarity it becomes more user-friendly. It's not as easy as ServiceNow or OneTrust. Those are much lighter tools and easier to learn. Scaling should be more user-friendly. We currently have around 9,000 active users and I expect that to increase in the future.

The scalability is easy to achieve.

Most of our clients are large businesses. I have plans to continue the usage of RSA Archer.

RSA Archer is scalable. The scalability is on various parameters. For user accounts, it is quite scalable.

I work with a large organization. We have 50,000 accounts.

This is a very scalable solution. After we implemented this solution, two different departments saw it and were impressed with the tool and how the work could be done centrally. We spoke with the vendor and added the scope for these departments. Now, it is centralized throughout the company.

We do plan to increase our usage of this solution. Its capabilities are almost infinite, but we're probably utilizing just twenty percent of it. We know its capabilities and what it can do, but there is a shortage in the availability of resources that can actually utilize the tool. There are perhaps three or four people that can use at least forty percent of the functionality.

We've assigned a task to a few team members so that someone can get a fresh look at how we can fully utilize it. It's a heavy tool and we want to use it. The problem is that it's just not that easy because you need someone who will actually understand the logic behind it, and also has the experience with the functionality. This is not expertise in the solution, but rather, the management. For example, we need someone who can understand the entire risk management flow in order for them to be able to use the tool efficiently.

Because of the vast differences in the domains being used in Archer, each team member is using a section of it. It's not really utilized how I want it, because I'm the leader of the team and I want to use this as the main tool for the entire IT department. However, I don't have the resources who can actually spend that much time to use it.

Scalability-wise, we already have a proven case. Deploying a solution in one company with a fixed, organized structure is one thing, but deploying at a mass level in multiple companies and bringing them all together in one single platform is a completely different thing. It proves the scalability of the solution. There is no doubt that it can be scaled to multiple organizations in one go.

We have more than 200 users. They are internal auditors, but if we also count the auditees who use the same system, the number would be much higher.

This solution is very easy to scale and easy for new users to understand.

We have various mechanisms to scale up. For example, we already have the lab configuration in RSA Archer, so we can use their lab to get that directory from the organization. And whenever it changes or updates, that's automatically reflected in RSA Archer too. So that is a very straightforward thing and easy to maintain also. And we plan to increase usage. My company is an RSA Archer partner, so they're always looking to increase the number of projects in RSA Archer. 

This solution is quite scalable. At that point, it really depends on the strategy. Since we had all our controls on Archer, it was easy for us to scale and deploy other applications or develop other applications seamlessly. But imagine you had your controls on a different application—if it was not on Archer and you had to scale, it would be challenging to move all your data into Archer and then scale. So that is something that could be challenging, but since our strategy was already Archer through and through, we did not find it difficult to scale. 

There are approximately 500 users, across all departments, using Archer. It is being used extensively at the moment. Right now, we don't have plans to increase usage, but I'm sure there's going to be organic growth. 

The solution is scalable.

The solution’s scalability is low compared to OpenPages. At present, we have two users for it in our organization. We might increase the usage ahead.

Starting from the outset, we have employed very few applications, the current number being just shy of 50. 

It is easy to scale. If we want to increase the number of users in Archer, we have so many tools. We can create more than 1,000 users in Archer at one time. We only need a license. 

Currently, more than 30,000 users are using Archer. We plan to keep using this solution. It is being used by so many companies.

The product is flexible and scalable. The processes that are created with the product are going to be used by every manager in this company. That is a total of about forty to sixty people right now.  

As far as how extensively I will use RSA Archer in development, everything I develop is per request. When somebody requests functionality, I am the one responsible for implementing it. It is not really possible to predict how often or how many requests come in or how complicated they will be. Usually, I am using it at least a few days every month. But I may be asked to implement an application that the other employees may use daily.  

We have 100 people using the solution. I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

Scaling up RSA Archer is a straightforward process. You just need to upgrade your hardware and software. We have about 80 end-users working on Archer now. 

The scalability of the solution is reasonable. 

Archer is easy to scale.

The product is easy to scale.

I found this product easy to scale.