A manual review appears free, but it is slow, out of date the moment you export it, and unable to prove that a flagged problem was fixed. Here is how the manual process compares to Provision.
| Spreadsheets & email | Provision | |
|---|---|---|
| Current view of access | Stale on export | Always current |
| Review workflow | Manual chasing | Routed and scheduled |
| Policy-based reviews | None | From your RBAC policy (Govern) |
| Proof of resolution | None | Task and evidence on every decision |
| Audit trail | Rebuilt after the fact | Timestamped, full, exportable |
| Preparation time per exam | Days to weeks | Hours |
| Leftover access | High risk | Resolved through tasks or automated removal |
Leaving spreadsheets behind is a change-management decision, not only a software one. That is why most institutions start with the Insight tier and prove the value on reviews before adding policy and automation.
Start with Insight →See how a review runs end to end in Provision, and what the examiner-ready export looks like.