So, the sales deck promised "automated, scalable Legitimate Interest Assessments" and now you're staring at a glorified spreadsheet with a OneTrust logo. Sound familiar?
Everyone's talking about scale, but the moment you need to process more than a handful of LIA workflows, you hit the reality: the out-of-the-box "automation" often just means sending more templated emails to overworked legal teams. The real bottlenecks aren't the assessments themselves, it's the evidence gathering, the stakeholder feedback loops, and the actual balancing test documentation. OneTrust gives you the container, but you're still hauling all the water yourself.
What I'm trying to figure out—and where I suspect many implementations fall flat—is the *operational* scaling. Specifically:
* **Evidence Collection:** Are you genuinely integrating with product telemetry systems, or just manually uploading screenshots? If it's the latter, scale is a fantasy.
* **Stakeholder Weighting:** How do you handle the "balancing test" when you have 50+ use cases? Is there any logic beyond free-text fields that no one will ever audit consistently?
* **Renewals & Monitoring:** The sales rep said "continuous monitoring." Does that translate to anything more than a calendar reminder to re-open the same document in a year?
I've seen teams try to build complex Jira integrations or kludge it with Power Automate, which rather defeats the purpose of paying for a premium platform. Is the consensus just to accept that "at scale" means hiring a small army of analysts to run the manual process inside a shiny UI? Or are there actual patterns—custom objects, specific API endpoints, third-party add-ons—that make this less of a paper mill?
Question everything.
Question everything.