What is our primary use case?
AuditBoard is user-friendly, highly intuitive, and simple to use. Additionally, the most significant concern for any user is avoiding accidental damage to the system. However, the system is very adaptable, so users need not worry about causing any damage.
How has it helped my organization?
The advantages of the AuditBoard system are diverse, including the ability to manage remote resources efficiently. For instance, I had a few team members working in Japan, while another couple of resources were in South Carolina, and I was based in Florida. Nevertheless, I could effortlessly access the system, monitor their progress, provide feedback, and engage in seamless communication regarding their workflow.
What is most valuable?
The most significant feature of AuditBoard is its community tools. It provides an internal communication platform that enables users to communicate within the system rather than relying on external tools such as Outlook or Microsoft products. By communicating within the system, all interactions are centralized and accessible, promoting a streamlined workflow.
This system offers a robust audit trail that preserves all notes and works as long as the user maintains their product membership. Moreover, email alerts are linked directly to the user's working box, provided their working emails are integrated with the system. This feature guarantees that users can easily access critical notifications and alerts.
Furthermore, in the event that someone sends a message within the tool while a user is not logged in, the user will receive a notification via their working email, informing them that there is a message or request waiting for them within the application.
What needs improvement?
AuditBoard could benefit from the addition of video capabilities, although it is not a necessity. Small companies that cannot afford licenses for Microsoft Teams or Zoom would benefit greatly from this feature, as it would enhance the communication process.
Another area for improvement is the integration of different modules within the tool. Currently, they are marketed separately, but it would be beneficial to have at least two or three solutions integrated into the system. This would simplify the purchasing process for users and enhance the overall functionality of the AuditBoard system.
The system has the capability to communicate through emails or messages, but it currently lacks video or audio communication features. Integrating Microsoft Teams or Zoom within the tool would be a great addition as it would allow for communication to occur within the system and ensure that it is all stored in one place. However, it is important to note that with Microsoft Teams, unless specified otherwise, conversations are automatically deleted after sixty to ninety days. This could be problematic for auditors, as documentation is essential. By having conversations within the tool, they become part of the documentation and are preserved for future reference. Using Zoom or Microsoft Teams to collect notes and communicate would be beneficial, as it allows for various forms of communication, such as video chats or messages. However, currently, AuditBoard does not offer these features.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have used AuditBoard for approximately three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We never experienced any downtime. The server was consistently up and the tool was always available when we needed it.
I rate the scalability of AuditBoard a nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The solution scales well.
We have approximately 120 users using the solution in my organization.
I rate the scalability of AuditBoard a ten out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
AuditBoard's support is highly responsive. They promptly address our queries and when they encounter questions they cannot answer, they involve additional experts in conference calls to provide solutions. They maintain continuous communication with us through phone calls and emails, even after implementing the solutions, to ensure stability and identify areas for improvement. This level of customer care and product support speaks volumes about their dedication to their customers.
I rate the support of AuditBoard a seven out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before transitioning to AuditBoard, I relied on Microsoft Excel. The decision to switch was driven by the desire to avoid errors, duplication of effort, data and documentation loss, and frustration associated with using SharePoint. In times like these, investing in a comprehensive solution like AuditBoard is a wise choice.
In contrast, with Microsoft Excel, it can be mentally challenging to remember the location of a specific worksheet after two or three years. However, with AuditBoard, you simply select the year, location, and process, and all relevant documentation is accessible in one place. This includes who completed the work, when it was done, how it was done, and any uploaded documentation, support, conclusions, review notes, and messages. It was an easy decision because AuditBoard was exactly what we were looking for.
How was the initial setup?
The implementation of AuditBoard can be somewhat challenging due to its many components. While the customer service department is helpful and provides a good implementation experience, some clients may not be knowledgeable about how to create or set up the tool. This can result in auditors going back and forth with the AuditBoard team to ensure a satisfactory implementation. However, the AuditBoard team is patient and works with us until we are happy with the final product.
The implementation time can vary depending on the complexity of the project. In our case, it took us around 180 days to complete the implementation and post-sales service. While it's possible to finish in 90 days or less, there are many factors that come into play and can cause delays. In our experience, we found that it takes about six months to make all the necessary adjustments and be completely satisfied with the implementation.
I rate the initial setup of AuditBoard a seven out of ten.
What about the implementation team?
Everything was kept in-house. This can be beneficial as long as the IT team is competent and capable of handling any issues that arise.
There were three of us involved in the process: two people working on uploading the data into the submission tool provided by AuditBoard, and myself overseeing the implementation process.
What was our ROI?
The return on investment for this tool is exceptionally high, particularly when considering the time saved by auditors, control owners, and process owners. We were able to reduce the processing time by an impressive 40 percent, which becomes even more significant when factoring in the hours spent on Excel per month by our team of around 120 people. Assuming an average hourly rate of $50, this equates to roughly $50,000 per month. However, with the 40 percent reduction in processing time, employees are now able to focus on other important tasks, leading to a decrease in cost per person. This translates to a return of $20,000, which means that the cost of the tool, which is $53,000 per year, can be recouped in just a few months, based solely on the use of the tool for one specific task - the Quality Control questionnaire, which is mandatory for our company. This astounding return on investment is not even considering other tasks such as testing, documentation, or report preparation. It is clear that the tool offers excellent value for money.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I collaborate with the contracts and conducted negotiations with AuditBoard. The contract terms are quite reasonable and offer good value for money, but there may be room for improvement. Perhaps a loyalty program could be implemented to reward long-term customers with savings. However, it is uncertain why they charge based on the number of controls. For instance, if you have a hundred controls as a basic package, you are only able to test that number within their platform. Additional controls beyond this number would incur extra charges, which was a surprise to us. We negotiated to reduce the number of controls, but this was not an ideal solution. Consistent pricing without any unexpected charges is crucial for our CFO's approval, and this model of charging for controls beyond a certain threshold was unexpected and the only weakness I perceived during the pricing negotiation process.
If you exceed the maximum number of controls allowed on the platform, you will be charged extra for additional sets of controls. This came as a surprise to us at first, and we negotiated to reduce the number of controls to be close to the maximum allowed. However, we don't want to have this model where we are charged for exceeding a certain threshold. It's difficult to negotiate and sell the solution to the CFO, so once it's approved, we want consistent pricing with no surprises. This was the only weakness we saw in the pricing negotiation regarding the manual controls that can be tested.
I rate the price of AuditBoard a five out of ten.
I highly recommend this tool as the price is reasonable. However, consistent pricing is important, and having a loyalty program that rewards long-term customers with lower prices would be a great addition.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We considered other options, such as Fortiva, and even acquired Workiva. However, at that time, three years ago, Workiva was mainly a financial reporting tool, which was great for the consolidation team. It was intuitive and well-liked. But when they began promoting it as an internal audit or Sarbanes-Oxley tool, it was still in development and did not meet our expectations. We used both companies for financial reporting and internal controls/audits.
What other advice do I have?
Individuals or organizations considering implementing AuditBoard should prepare themselves to ensure that their risk control matrices are updated and that their data is aligned with the template. They should also have a clear vision of what they want to achieve, as this tool is highly scalable and flexible in terms of implementation. Transitioning from an Excel-based system may pose some challenges, as it did for our organization, but once we received guidance on how to effectively replicate our existing system in AuditBoard, the benefits became apparent. It is important for companies to be open-minded and recognize that there may be some initial heavy lifting required, but the payoff in terms of the tool's performance is well worth it.
I rate AuditBoard a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.