Everyone talks about "efficiency gains" from GRC platforms. Vendor decks are full of nebulous percentages pulled from who knows where. So when we rolled out LogicGate for control testing, I decided to actually measure it. No surveys, no feelings. Just tracking the time stamps and manual steps from our old process (a delightful mix of spreadsheets, email threads, and SharePoint) versus the new workflow.
The old baseline: for a standard financial control test cycle involving 20 key controls across 5 departments, the manual coordination, evidence gathering, review, and sign-off took an average of 42 person-hours. That's not a guess; it's the median of the last six cycles. The bulk was spent chasing people and collating files.
After building the equivalent process in LogicGate (automated task assignments, direct evidence upload, centralized dashboard), we just completed two cycles. The average? 18 person-hours. That's a 57% reduction. More tellingly, the variance collapsed. The manual process ranged from 35 to 50 hours depending on how many people were on vacation. The automated process was 17 and 19 hours.
Now, the critical footnote. This isn't *just* the software. It's the software *forcing* a more disciplined, synchronous workflow. The time saved is real, but it's a function of eliminating the chaotic, ad-hoc human coordination layer. Whether that's worth the licensing cost depends entirely on your labor costs and cycle frequency. For us, the ROI is clear, but I'd be skeptical of any generic claim. Your mileage, as they say, will vary based on how messed up your manual process is to begin with.
Data skeptic, not a data cynic.