Omada Identity Reviews

As an Omada partner, we are integrating the Omada Identity Suite for our customers.

Our customers primarily use it to align their identity lifecycle and access management. In some cases, they also use the integrated workflow engine that Omada has to migrate existing paper-based workflows to a digital platform.

Our customers have realized several benefits from using this product. What we have seen is that they are more efficiently driving Identity and Access Management processes. Many of them that were being performed manually could be automated. This means that they save resources, such as manpower, to focus on other topics.

Omada Identity Suite benefits our clients by introducing the Least Privilege Methodology when it comes to their coverage.

The biggest benefits come from automation, reporting, and easier onboarding of new staff.

Omada has definitely helped to reduce the number of help desk tickets and requests. For example, one interesting feature is the automatic password reset. This is something that can now be done by the end-user themself, and no longer necessitates calling the head office. This is very beneficial when it comes to reducing support tickets and telephone calls.

Omada Identity Suite has a very powerful workflow engine. It is used for requesting access for approval to everything that's around Access Management and for re-certification purposes. It is easy to set or reset the state for accessing resources.

In terms of the breadth and scope of the features, in the current version, they are trying to cover access management and identity governance for the whole company. Over the past years, they have broadened the features to include new functionality based on customer feedback and reviews. We routinely give Omada suggestions as to what can be improved, either in terms of adding modules or some other aspect that has not been covered very well. Based on that, they have come up with certain exciting new features. For example, they have built new interfaces and new ways of configuring the system.

At the same time, they have also built up more functionality to add business values. Specifically, they developed a practice framework of processes that can be rolled out in a company very easily. It was created based on experience that they gained from past projects and customers.

What I would most like to see added to the product is role management, especially enterprise or business role management, and the processes around that.

I would like to see some kind of role-mining functionalities to help existing Access Management processes. For example, business roles and existing role models could be identified and imported into Omada. There are definitely some possibilities for improvement in this area.

I have been working with Omada Identity since 2007, between 13 and 14 years ago.

Over the many years that I have worked with this product, the operation has always been stable. Especially when a new version is released, there are sometimes bugs. In cases like these, the support response times could be improved.

In the latest version, there have been big improvements with scalability. If you add more compute then you can scale this solution without limits.

I would rate the support a seven out of ten.

Sometimes, the time it takes to respond to a ticket is too long. Also, it can take a long time to provide a fix. Things have improved recently but if I consider my entire experience with them, the time we spend waiting for a resolution is too long.

I have not been a part of many migration projects, so I cannot speak about the experience of transitioning from another product.

I have experience with One Identity Manager and NetIQ Identity Manager. The user interface is much more flexible in Omada Identity, which makes it easier to use and configure. This is definitely a pro.

The con is that some products provide better connectivity with other systems. For example, NetIQ Identity Manager brings some connectivity, especially with the mainframe systems that are seen in the financial industries. Such connectivity does not come out of the box with Omada. There is also a provisioning engine from NetIQ, for example, which is more stable and more flexible than the Omada solution.

With respect to the IGA functionality, Omada has more flexibility than NetIQ. You can customize, adapt, and configure it to a greater degree and with less effort.

In terms of the installation, the initial setup of the suite and the components is very straightforward and well documented.

When it comes to the introduction of the Identity and Access processes with Omada, it can be very complex and it can also be very straightforward. It depends on the complexity of the processes that the customer demands. Omada has a best practices paper that explains how to set up various types of projects. When you follow that process, starting with some basic setup, then moving on to the improvements and continuing to roll out iteratively, I think it's very straightforward.

In terms of the time required for deployment, it again depends on the complexity of the processes that need to be integrated. You can have projects where it is fully deployed within weeks, and you can have bigger projects for bigger companies with more complex processes that can take a year or even longer to deploy.

Our implementation strategy begins with the need for a business concept. After that, we do some requirements engineering and talk about existing processes with the customer. Together, we decide what to migrate and what to introduce.

We then begin with a basic setup to introduce the first phase of the project. From that point, we use an iterative or agile approach to onboard more applications.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is that it's a good policy to follow Omada's best practice strategy, with not too many customizations. I suggest sticking to Omada's standard model and approach with respect to implementation. This is what we recommend to our customers.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use cases are identity lifecycle, provisioning, and authorizations to our IT infrastructure. We use it for provisioning to our SAP platform. We also need it to make a survey of the IT authorizations. We need to make sure that our managers can review the authorizations of the employees in our company. 

We have a couple of secondary use cases as well, such as segregation of duties on provisionings to make sure that we have correct approval flows for authorizations. 

The automatic provisioning of a lot of authorizations has definitely lightened the load on the manual part of authorization management. It has not directly caused savings in our operations, but our administrators have seen a dip in the number of manual tasks they had to do. So, that's a direct business value for us from the platform.

It has helped in reducing the number of helpdesk tickets and requests by at least 30%.

The identity lifecycle support is definitely valuable because we are a complex organization, and there is a lot of onboarding, movement, and offboarding in our organization. We have 31,000 users, and there are a lot of users who are constantly onboarding, offboarding, and moving. So, we need to make sure that these activities are supported. In old times, we used to do everything manually. Everyone was onboarded, offboarded, or moved manually. So, from a business point of view and an economics point of view, identity lifecycle is most valuable. From a security point of view, access review is the most important feature for us.

Our internal customers are quite happy with the product, and we receive a lot of positive feedback. Its identity-governance and administration features are very broad. It can support a lot of use cases. I don't think we use a broad part of the product, but it is a very broad platform that can be used for a lot of different things.

It provides a lot of flexibility for our security operations. We can combine the security operations of the product with other security operations, such as logging, surveillance of our infrastructures, and things like that. I sit in the security office primarily, and identity governance is a part of our operations in security. So, it provides a lot of flexibility for a lot of different use cases.

Error handling can be improved. From an on-premise perspective, internal support can be improved. It is quite a technical and difficult application to maintain. A very specialized skill set is required to operate and maintain it, which is the most difficult part. The process to upgrade versions is also quite tricky.

One thing that we are not so happy about is the user interface. It is a bit dated. I know that they are working on that, but the user interface is quite dated. Currently, it is a little bit difficult to customize the user interface to the need of the business, which is a little bit disappointing. It needs it to be a little bit easier to operate, and it should have a better user interface.

Their technical support is good, but there is room for improvement. It is not an easy product to support. They helped us set it up a little bit, but it gets difficult for them to handle more complex problems.

I have been using this solution for the last year.

The product itself is quite stable. The problem is that it is quite complex with all the integrations, which is applicable to all IGA solutions. There is a lot of need for surveillance on the solution itself, but it is not because of the solution itself. It is because of all the integrations. So, the solution itself is quite stable, but the integrations make it quite vulnerable to all kinds of stuff.

It seems quite scalable in terms of performance and in terms of the ability to scale itself.

Their technical support is good, but there is room for improvement. One problem that we have discussed with Omada several times is their handling of a customer-specific problem and a solution-specific problem. The coordination between their technical support and their backend developers can be better. It becomes an issue when a problem is more complex. It is not an easy product to support. They helped us set it up a little bit, but it gets difficult for them to handle more complex problems.

It was an internally developed solution. We switched to Omada because our previous solution didn't support governance. It was only for ordering new authorizations, and the level of automation was limited.

It was a complex process in terms of technicality and the amount of effort needed for setting it up from Omada's point of view.

We started in August 2018, and we finally deployed the solution and were ready for production in June 2020. So, it took 18 months.

We had to deploy or onboard a part of our infrastructure at once. We onboarded a couple of applications and our SAP solution on day one. Omada would probably call it the big bang, but it was definitely not the big bang. We deployed a lot of functionalities at once, but it was a very limited part of our total application portfolio that we deployed with Omada. It is not yet done. The first one and a half or two years will go into implementing the rest of our application portfolio in the solution.

We used Omada itself as an implementation partner. The consultants themselves were quite adept at handling the product. From a technical standpoint, they were definitely above average. From a project management point of view, we would have liked to see some improvements. This is from the perspective of a very large customer. The problem for us was handling an organization of our size. If I have to choose again, instead of Omada, I would choose an implementation partner who is more used to handling large enterprises. That was definitely a pain point for us.

It is quite a technical and difficult application to maintain. It is a standard solution, but some parts of the solution make it difficult to upgrade and maintain the solution. A very specialized skill set is required to operate and maintain it. You should either pay Omada or another consultancy firm to maintain the solution, or you should have internal resources for maintaining the solution. 

We have around 10 people who are directly involved in its maintenance. They are on the business side, such as for onboarding new applications, front-end problem-solving, and incident-handling, as well as on the operations side, such as for ensuring data validation, handling integrations, and things like that. 

It is very difficult to say at this point. We are a municipal organization, and we do not, as such, do a very systematic review on the return on investment. I would say we have seen a positive ROI, but I'm not sure.

It is also very difficult to say whether it has reduced the total cost of ownership. My gut feeling is that it has, but we have not made a precise estimate of what economic impact it has had on us.

Our business is regulated and subject to audit fines, but again, it is too difficult to estimate whether it has reduced the number of audit fines we have received. It is too early to estimate that, but I would guess it has.

From an on-prem point of view, the cost is quite transparent and reasonable. The direct cost is primarily for licenses and maintenance on licenses.

We evaluated other solutions. I don't remember them all. We did a market analysis where we considered SailPoint. We definitely reached out to Microsoft as well but not for their identity solution as such. We reached out to them for their future solutions in this environment.

We only did a market analysis. Being in the public sector, we have a very strictly EU-regulated process for procurement. So, it is quite difficult to do a look-and-feel kind of selection of tools.

I was not directly involved in the market analysis. As far as I know, our tender showed that from a technical standpoint, all evaluated solutions were comparable in functions and features for our intent and purpose. They were not identical, but they were comparable in functions and features.

Any business interested in using this product needs to make sure that they are ready to either pay Omada or another consultancy firm to maintain the solution, or they should have the internal resources for maintaining the solution. It is quite a difficult solution in terms of maintenance.

It is very important to make sure that the master data is correct and is controlled by processes rather than humans. This is very important. We thought that we had a very good understanding of our master data, and it was mostly supported by processes and not by people, but we certainly were caught a bit by some of the things. So, having control over your master data is the most important thing. 

If you are a reasonable-sized organization, you should be very careful and make sure that the implementation partner has the correct implementation model that suits your need. You need to make sure that you have the correct support, or the means to find the correct support, for the application itself when you go live. These are definitely the three most important things.

I would rate Omada Identity a seven out of 10. There is definitely room for improvement, but it is not a bad product. It is a good product, and seven, in my book, is for a good product. 

We are provisioning new accounts. We are deprovisioning accounts that are gone. In Omada Identity, you can connect transfers (external employees who came to work for us) very easily. We have had trouble doing this with a new front-end system, not Omada Identity, where accounts are not connected. With Omada Identity, I can connect accounts and change everything that I have to do.

We can manage access for everyone, including suppliers, partners, and maintenance staff. Now, in Active Directory, there is accountability for everyone. If someone is responsible for an account, we can see who is responsible. 

We use the main portal of Omada Identity.

We are not using the solution fully, but we are getting there slowly.

When we started with identity and access management, we cleaned up and skipped 500 accounts. Therefore, there are a lot of people who are still in our system. Using this tool, we have cleaned up a lot of accounts for ourselves as well as our partners and suppliers. So, we can manage everything now.

When we switched to Omada Identity, it was easy for everyone. The solution was so smooth. Managers can do a lot of our work processes themselves, which reduces a lot of tickets.

We can sync our administrator accounts with our normal accounts. So when an administrator no longer works for us, their account is disabled. This provides us control because when we did the admin accounts, there were a lot of admins who were already gone, but they still had an account in Active Directory.

Our test accounts are now managed and feasible.

The interface is nice. I can do so much myself. I don't need my supplier for everything. I can change emails and add attachments. 

I like it very much that it is a self-reliant solution as well as user-friendly. I made a handout for managers and other users, and it was very easy to explain how to use the system. It's not difficult. We have workflows that are so simple, and you can explain them to somebody else in a very easy way.

Omada Identity has a reporting server that we use. With emails or usernames from an application, we can create a report and check on those users in the application regularly. For example, if you send me a list of users, I will send you back information on those users, like their end dates and activity. This way, the auditor can see we are in control.

We now use multi-factor authentication (MFA). To let people working from home register for MFA, we put them in an Active Directory group where the date and group are set. If someone needs to reinstall the application, you can set a new date in Omada Identity. So, I only have to set a date, then everything necessary happens.

I would like to search on date fields, which is not possible now.

I am unable to connect our organizations' tables and our partners to create a report in the solution. Sometimes you have to connect two different tables of your report. For now, I make a report for one, then I make a report for the other. After that, I combine them in Excel, but this is time-consuming. We are waiting for the newest version to come out at the end of the month. Hopefully, the feature to connect to other applications will be available with this release. Otherwise, we will have to wait for the next one. It would be nicer if we could get it sooner.

At the end of May 2019, we got Omada Identity.

The scalability is great. It is not often that I hear that our supplier can't do something with Omada Identity.

We manage 6,500 users with Omada Identity.

Right now, I don't feel that I have any influence on the features that they are delivering to us. My supplier has also said that if they ask something, then they have to wait a very long time for it. I would like it if they would tell us, "We can't do everything at this time. Many requests have come in all at once. But, what request would you like us to prioritize?" If they could also provide time frames for requests, this would help us understand when we would get our requests.

Our suppliers and partners need to be in Omada Identity as well. That wasn't possible when we had only MIM from Microsoft. Now, I can manage partner types with the access management, creating an organizational unit and partner. Then, I can put the people who only have access in the system, so we can connect the two systems. This way, we can really manage all the people coming into our building and using our systems.

With Omada Identity, we can manage the partners and supplier accounts. This was the primary reason that we switched from MIM. We can also connect other applications, though we are still working on this.

The solution has reduced our total cost of ownership compared to our previous solution.

The initial setup took a long time, over six months, because of our supplier. Omada said that they have an integration with CyberArk, so we wouldn't have to build anything because it was there already. We would only have to install it. Then, the supplier told us, "We have to make it," but it was already there. If it was there, I don't understand why it took so long.

I worked side-by-side with the supplier. We have a very good connection with our supplier, Traxion. We see them more as a partner. We work well together, learning from each other.

There were a lot of administrator, partner, and supplier accounts for people who were no longer working for us but still in the system. So, we reduced the number of users no longer with the company, which saved us some money on licensing.

I don't know if they looked at other suppliers or systems.

When we started, our supplier recommended using MIM at first, then Omada Identity. Now, I would recommend starting with Omada Identity and getting the entire solution, so you can do everything in Omada Identity and aren't using two systems.

I am cleaning up accounts with the help of the functional administrator. This is very easy to do.

I am a happy customer. We have our identity and access management under control with Omada Identity. I would rate this solution as a nine (out of 10). 

I used it in my previous company for identity governance or identity administration. We used it for tracking who had access to the data warehouse and for workflows for requesting approval for access. We also had access verification to ensure that the right person had access.

We were using its latest version, and we were upgrading it regularly.

It has a lot of out-of-the-box features. It is flexible, and there are a lot of possibilities to configure and extend it. 

It is user-friendly. It has an interface that is end-user or business-user friendly.

Its flexibility is both a good thing and a bad thing. Because it is very flexible, it also becomes too complex. This is common for most of the products we evaluated.

Its scalability should be better. It had a few scalability issues.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is quite stable.

It is partly scalable on-premises. There are some scalability issues, but they are, of course, very organization-specific.

We had about 10,000 users, but all of them were not using it on a daily basis. There were just a few hundred active users because it was not fully rolled out for all kinds of requests. The end goal was 5,000 to 10,000 daily users, but at that time, there were only a few hundred users. We planned to keep using it.

I have interacted with them because we had used the vendor instead of a third-party integrator, which worked well for us. We had almost direct contact with technical support and their specialized development team.

The main reason for choosing this vendor was the geographical part. Omada is headquartered in Denmark, so it is a European company. The company I was working for was a Norwegian company, and we were close to the management, engineers, and development team of Omada, which also made it much easier to have good contact with technical support. If we had chosen an American company, we wouldn't have got the same experience.

Its installation is easy. You can install it over a weekend, but connecting with different parts of the organization takes time, which is applicable to all products in this area. The core installation is simple and easy, but integrations take time.

We had someone from our company, and we also took help from the vendor. We didn't use a third-party integrator. We got professional services from the vendor's organization.

It is licensed per managed user per year.

I would recommend this solution to others depending on their use cases. It definitely depends on which of the use cases are important for that company. I used it in my previous company, and I am currently in another company. If I am evaluating it for exactly the same use cases, I would definitely consider this product again.

I would rate Omada Identity a seven out of ten.

Everything is related to identity governance, such as

• Certification
• Joiner, Mover, and Leaver (JML) use cases
  
• Access request for use cases
• Provisioning use cases
• Workflow.

In a fully implemented Omada Identity solution, all these use cases are equally important.

We have on-prem Omada customers, then we also have the Omada SaaS customers. We always work with the latest version of this solution.

Our customers have benefited from Omada Identity automating the certification process. Most of our customers were using manual methods for user access certification. With Omada Identity, you can automate almost all of it, which means that certification now becomes on demand. You don't have to wait for two or three months to execute a certification timeframe. Instead, you can do certifications as often as you want. 

Another benefit is automated provisioning of user accounts when you replace manual provisioning. 

Omada Identity has reduced the number of audit fines that some of our customers have received by more than 80 percent.

Omada Identity is a very feature-rich solution. Its features are designed based on a methodology called identity plus.

For our customers who prefer having a SaaS solution, they also prefer a cloud-native solution. This is a big requirement for them.

The Omada Identity SaaS version isn't as flexible as Omada Identity on-premise. It is expected behavior though. Often, customers under estimate the level of controls and flexibility when moving to SaaS. We want customers to carefully evaluate and analyze each use case and/or requirement. 

We work closely with Omada and understand the roadmap, which addresses what market is demanding, incrementally in each release.

It has been about three years that we have been implementing Omada Identity for customers.

We haven't had any scalability issues with our customers. Omada Identity has been scalable to our customer requirements. It's a high-capacity solution, so large environments (more than 2000 users) is not a problem for Omada Identity. 

Omada is at par with the industry standard at this point for scalability. They aren't extraordinary yet, but they are working on it. They are probably at par with their competitors.

The Omada product documentation could use a good uplift. Some documentation is outdated as well as other documentation can be less descriptive than it should be.

There are some initial challenges when it comes to support. However, I am very happy to see it drastically improving. 

If you are using the provided connectors and configuration out-of-the-box, then it is straightforward. However, if you require custom connectors or configurations, that setup is can get complex. 

An average deployment takes three to six months.

Our implementation strategy varies based on the customer's requirements.

We provide deployment and post-deployment support. In a deployment scenario, there will be one or more implementation engineers along with an architect and project manager. Then, in the post-deployment support, we have architects and engineers.

The initial total cost of ownership to implement Omada Identity is not small. The TCO for the implementation is comparable to other solutions. However, the cost of maintaining the solution is at par or lower than competitors, including adding more features or maintaining the system after the initial deployment/installation to make sure that they are available for users to use or extending the functionalities of those activities. Those maintenance costs are lower than other vendors.

It has reduced the number of our help desk tickets from 25 to 75 percent.

Compared to competitors, Omada Identity is either equal or more feature-rich than comparable solutions, e.g., RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle (IGL), SailPoint IdentityIQ, and Oracle Identity Governance, because of its identity plus methodology. 

Omada workflow designer is a feature for which we have gotten very good feedback. Ease of configuration is also something Omada Identity does better than others in the market. However, customizability is something where Omada is not as good as its competitors.

The time that it takes to get up and running with this solution compared to RSA and SailPoint is almost similar.

Carefully evaluate your use cases before starting an implementation. Have an identity management program defined before starting technical implementation. That would be my most important advice. 

Define your use cases clearly. 

Have all parties involved. Not having management buy-in almost always led to difficulties in the project.

Omada has defined and documented the Identity Plus Process based on their experience. This is an excellent reference guide to implement an Identity program.

Everything considered, I would rate this solution as an eight out of 10.

Our clients use it to onboard apps for provisioning, not just collections. They use Omada for provisioning to business applications, such as SAP and PeopleSoft. They use ServiceNow as the front door to that but Omada is for their accounting and their HR business applications. It's mostly used for the governance piece, certification—GRC.

Compliance is often what the issue is for our customers. They want to hurry up and get these products onboarded and set them up for provisioning for their business application, so they can meet whatever regulatory compliance controls they're trying to meet.

We're an Omada partner/vendor. We implement both their on-prem and SaaS versions.

From a security perspective, we've got customers that are failing audits or that are in danger of failing audits, because they can't do certifications. While it's not necessarily an improvement to the way their business functions, Omada certainly helps customers remain compliant with those audits. It makes them more efficient, and it's easier for them to support the audit requirements they have to remain compliant.

The solution also helps reduce total cost of ownership. In cases where they're swapping out Oracle, or they're swapping out RSA's Aveksa or IGO product, it's certainly reducing total cost of ownership. And, when we're moving clients from an on-prem, legacy IGO or IGA solution to the cloud solution, they no longer have the infrastructure issues and it's a lot easier to maintain. It's not as complex as an Oracle. Certainly, when we're replacing some of those legacy systems—IBM, Oracle, CA—it definitely reduces total cost of ownership.

Another benefit is that it has helped to reduce the number of helpdesk tickets and requests, specifically when combined with ServiceNow, which we've done in a couple of instances. In that scenario it drastically reduces the helpdesk tickets. Omada has the workflow built into it that allows a lot of work that used to be done through the helpdesk to be automated. We try to build more automation into the system in an effort to reduce the amount of support that's required for it.

It has also absolutely reduced the number of audit fines that our customers receive. A few of our Omada customers have either had audit findings, or did a pre-audit and knew the findings were coming, or they were trying to clean up from an audit finding by using the solution to do so. We see a reduction in audit fines in at least half of the cases where we implement the product.

The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance.

I would like to see them expand the functionality of the tool to continue to be competitive with the monsters out there. For example, they could add functionality on the authentication side, functionality that Octa and SailPoint have. But they should do that while maintaining the same simplicity that makes Omada a product of choice today.

We've been working with Omada for four or five years now.

We have a lot of choices out there in the market to spend our time on. We've chosen Omada as one of the products that we support. It has been very stable. We haven't seen any issues related to stability so far.

When it comes to scalability of Omada's cloud-native SaaS solution, we've used it with a Fortune 10 customer and a Fortune 100 customer. It's definitely scalable. The fact is, we're connecting it to SAP which is running the internal organizations of some of these companies. It's a new product, so it probably hasn't gone through enough Fortune 500 companies to say that it has been fully tested at that scale, but the customers that we work with are pretty significant customers.

In terms of our customers increasing usage of Omada, if they've gone through the process, they have a prioritization of the applications that need to be onboarded to an IGA tool. Once they get those high-priority applications onboarded, there's the never-ending list of additional applications to get onboarded. The priority for onboarding applications could be business-related, it could be audit-finding related, or it could be SOX-related. The client makes that determination. 

We've integrated the product with CyberArk and ServiceNow, to automate some of the helpdesk support that is typically required. Most of our customers are at the stage where they're saying, "Hey, let's get this Oracle HR product onboarded as our system of record, and work from there to onboard the other apps." Most customers, even the small customers, have an endless list of applications that need to be onboarded, once they have onboarded their highest priority applications.

We have relationships with Omada from the chief revenue officer, all the way down. When we really need to make something happen, we can put that call in and make it happen.

But from what I know from our customers that have used Omada's technical support, they seem to believe those guys to be as adequate as any of the competitors in the space.

The complexity of the initial deployment of Omada depends on the customer. But one of the reasons we chose to become a product vendor for Omada is because of the simplicity. It's the perfect fit for a lot of customers that don't need the complexity of an Oracle, or of a CA, or even a SailPoint. That's one of the main factors that attracted us to the product.

The implementation strategy is going to depend on the customer and where they are in the process. The pre-implementation strategy is to find customers that meet what we've defined as the sweet spot of customers, where Omada is the best fit for them. They are customers that are looking for this, this, and this, they're this size, and they're at this stage in their maturity model. We like Omada for the SMB market because you can get your hands around an implementation. You can get them on the cloud version and get them up and running pretty quickly. 

If it's a customer that doesn't require a lot of complex workflows, it's a simple product to get installed and get up and running. However, it still does have the heft to be able to support some of the more complex custom configurations and workflows, if they need that in the future.

There is no such thing as an "average deployment," but 90 days would not be a stretch for getting some of our clients up and running and getting an app or two onboarded, with some pre-built-in workflows.

The number of staff required for deployment is also deployment-specific, but we'll typically have a team of between two to ten people, depending on the size of the deployment and what the customer wants to do.

Some of our legacy clients—and when I say legacy, I'm talking about two to three years ago—are using the on-prem version. Whether a client goes with the SaaS or the on-prem really depends on what the customer is looking for. A lot of customers are going for SaaS because of the "flash-to-bang." The pitch is that with one of the starter packs, you can get them up and running with a system of record in a shorter amount of time than with the on-prem version. That's typically the preference. Customers want to get up and running. They're running from an audit, they're running to meet compliance, they're running for a deadline. They typically want to go SaaS so they can get some quick wins under their belts. The on-prem takes a little bit more coordination with their onsite technical and security guys.

The ROI that we see is the "flash-to-bang." You can get in there and get the implementation up and running. 

There is definitely also ROI, that I can't quantify, in getting clients compliant with findings and in getting their highest priority applications up and onboarded.

Where we do see a lot of ROI is with the cloud version in particular. When we do these implementations, we require time from the customer's internal IT staff. With COVID, those guys have been busy making sure folks can work remotely and protecting themselves from all the different threat vectors that have presented themselves during COVID. The cloud version requires the least amount of time of the internal IT staff, so there is definitely ROI there.

Omada continues to be very competitive on pricing, especially on the Omada cloud product.

In terms of the solution's IGA features, I'm not going to say Omada's are pretty broad but there is enough breadth there to support some large customers that are using that product. It's definitely compatible, in terms of breadth, with other products out there in the market.

We support SailPoint. We've done a little work with Saviynt. We've worked with some of the legacy solutions, like Oracle OIG and RSA. We're familiar with other IGO and IGA solutions in the market.

Compared to some of the more complex tools, with Omada you can cut the implementation time in half, or even more than that. We look for the customers that fit that Omada mold. For the customers that don't have the complex workflows, and where you don't have to wade through 37,000 guys in their IT shop to make something happen, it's certainly a much easier product to get installed. That's why we like it.

But there is competition. All these vendors are now offering cloud solutions, like SailPoint's IdentityNow. Saviynt is a cloud-based solution. But when it comes to some of the legacy ones, you can certainly reduce your implementation time by 50 percent or more.

And on the pure governance part, Omada is definitely maintaining some of the same functionality as the other vendors out there in the market. It's not going to have all of the functionality of the SailPoint on-prem version. But it's more than adequate for the average customer.

The only advice I would give is the same advice I give anywhere: Know your requirements and then make sure that the Omada product is the product that best fits your requirements. If it does, you can get it in and up and running in a more reasonable amount of time than some of the competitors on the market.

What I've learned from using the solution is that Omada has a certain place in the market. When we find a customer that has the set of requirements that Omada is a really good fit for, we can get them up and running pretty quickly, without their having to spend a ton of money, and without their having to spend a ton of their internal IT resource time. Omada is probably marketing to everybody, but for us, there's a certain customer where we say, "Okay, they're heavy on this, they're light on this, they want this, they have this issue, that issue, and this requirement. Okay, perfect fit for Omada." When we find that, we end up with really happy customers because we can show them some progress in 30, 60, or 90 days, as opposed to a two-year deployment in other cases.

I am the functional manager. I use the solution for user access management.

The product provides good security. Every access is secure. We saw the benefits of the solution right after the deployment.

The administrative features and SoD are valuable.

It would be nice if we could use queries. It is not possible to customize reports on Omada Identity. Everything is fixed. We can only use the standard options. It would be very nice if we could write queries using the SQL database.

I have been using the solution for 2.5 years.

The tool is stable.

The tool's scalability is fine.

My team contacts the support team. The support is slow.

Neutral

I worked with One Identity before. We could customize reporting using One Identity. Omada Identity and One Identity have their positives and negatives. Omada is a better tool. However, some features are not very good. The reporting takes more work on Omada.

The deployment is not easy. It takes too long. My colleagues always have issues after deployment.

My colleagues deployed the product in my organization.

The reporting is very poor. It is impossible to see which people are under what rules. Omada is set up to remove employees' access as soon as they leave our organization. It works very well.

I use Omada for role-based access control. We can create roles for the team or members of the organization. When they leave the organization, the role is removed automatically. It is beneficial to us.

Even though I use Omada, I still need the other systems we use. Omada helps automate reviews of access requests and reroutes them to the appropriate people. I use Omada Connectivity Community, but not much.

Overall, I rate the product a 7 out of 10.

My primary use cases of this solution are to manage the life cycle of identities, manage authorizations for applications, and the re-certification of authorizations.

The most valuable feature of this product is that it gives you a dashboard on which applications the user has access. It's also a user-friendly solution. 

I would like to see some additional functionality and improvements in usability.

I have been using this solution for one and a half years.

This solution's stability is fine, with no issues. Maintenance requires three to four people.

We had good support from the supplier for this product.

Before you start implementation, you should think about the impact the solution will have on the company. Also, if you have very old or obsolete data, you should remove it prior to implementation. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

Our primary use cases are around employee life cycle processes. Employees join us, extend their contracts, move around, and leave us. Omada is connected to our HR system as well as SAP, Microsoft Exchange, and Active Directory.

We also use it for updating our employee master data and use the request management, covering about 900 employees.

We are an Omada partner and reseller.

The best feature in Omada Identity is that it enables us to implement standardized employee life cycle processes so that we don't have to create them ourselves. We can then use the standard workflows.

The breadth and scope of the solution’s IGA features also fulfill our requirements. 

We are trying to use Omada's standards and to adapt our processes. But we have had some trouble with the bad documentation. This is something that they could improve on. It has not been possible for us to analyze some of the problems so far, based on the documentation. We always need consultants. The documentation should include some implementation hints and some guidelines for implementing the processes. It's an area that could definitely be improved.

We have been using Omada Identity for about a year.

We have not had any major issues with the system so far.

We are planning to implement more and more of these standard processes and to connect more target systems to it.

We haven't submitted any support tickets to Omada so far because we have been solving our issues with consultants.

Our previous solution was developed in-house by my colleagues. We switched to Omada because the old solution did not have any standards. In addition, the components it used were end-of-life and we decided to use software that offers more standards out-of-the-box.

The initial setup was complex. We have so many different stakeholders in our company and they all have their specific requirements, but we were trying to standardize things. We have struggled with all the requirements and have tried to reduce the special implementations to a standard.

Our implementation of Omada took about half a year.

In terms of maintaining the solution, we have four people involved. Two are technical application managers who are in charge of the operation of the system. And we have two guys who are mainly dealing with the implementation of the employee processes, connecting to the target systems, as well as some scripting.

We used consultants from Omada. Our experience with them was okay.

So far, we have not saved money compared to our previous solution because we are struggling with some internal issues. We have had some trouble with our HR data, but we expect that we will save money, using Omada, by the end of this year.

Because we are a partner and an IT service provider, we have a special licensing agreement because we are planning to offer Omada Identity to our customers. Our licensing and pricing model differs from the standard.

Because we operate this on-premises and just connect it to internal systems, we have had no security issues so far.

Be sure to use Omada's standards and try to reduce special implementations. You may have to adapt your processes to reduce all the specific requirements from the stakeholders. But my advice is to reduce the special requirements to a minimum.

Also, because you're connecting the HR system to the employee master data and organizational data, all this data has to be clean. Otherwise, you will have a lot of trouble with Omada. Make sure your master data is in good shape.

We are using Omada Identity Cloud, their SaaS version, as part of our identity and access management proposition towards our customers. We are an IT security company situated in the Netherlands. What we're trying to do: We give our customers guidance in their needs, aims, and goals regarding identity and access management. Therefore, we are the trusted partner for our customers in order to give them control over their identity and access management landscape, and we use Omada for this. We provide managed services for our clients.

It is all cloud native. What we do, we say, "Dear customer: We can help bring your landscape under control from an identity and access management perspective. For that, we use Omada as our platform."

Omada Identity Cloud is part of our proposition to help us manage environments. If we don't have a product underneath, then it is quite difficult. Therefore, we had to choose a product solution to make our proposition believable.

The governance part is the most valuable feature. The governance processes are defined, and it is quite easy to report upon the compliance. The compliance reporting is very good. 

From my perspective, the IGA features cover everything and are quite broad.

They need to improve the cost for small companies.

We have just started to use this solution.

The scalability of the product is good. There is a lot of functionality within it, without paying extra costs. It is quite complete on its own, and there are no hidden costs. 

It scales in terms of numbers and types of identities. It can govern the on-premise applications as well as the cloud applications. So, it can manage hybrid environments with all types of identities and various load amounts. 

They know what they are doing when setting up the business because this is their core business. There is no waiting time if you need to schedule a meeting with them. They provide a quick response time. Compared to other solutions, their response time is fast and done in a short amount of time.

We are starting the configuration stage right now. 

The initial setup has been straightforward. It is a quick setup, which is flexible and user-friendly.

They set up the environment, which makes it almost immediately available for us. Then, we can configure the solution for our customers' needs, as the customer wants, and as we think is best for our customers. That makes it flexible, so we do not have to make any big investments in terms of hardware.

We have a customer lead who is responsible for all contact with a given customer. We also have a project manager finishing the implementation process, then we have a couple of engineers and a solution architect. There are about five people who are involved.

With a SaaS solution, you don't have to buy something, install it, and activate it on your balance sheet. That is one of the clear benefits. 

They offer a complete solution. However, the pricing is too high for SMBs.

With the cloud solution, spinning up the system is quite easy. Afterwards, you configure and pay for all the use by customers, which is then paid by the customers.

We evaluated other vendors from the Gartner Magic Quadrant (the ones that were near Omada Identity Cloud) when looking for a solution. 

We are just starting with this product. We have a clear vision of what we want with our proposition, so we chose Omada Identity because it is a good product in regards to scalability and being a cloud-native solution.

We feel Omada has the same understanding of what is going on in the market as us. Our strategies are quite well-aligned. The decision to choose Omada Identity Cloud was not only about the product, but at least 50 percent about the company too.

It is very important that it is a cloud-native solution. The world is moving towards the cloud, which is a trend that you cannot change. Based on that, it is quite evident that you want a partner that has a product from a cloud-native perspective. Assets are less on-premise and more on the cloud now, so it's more about functionality and processing as well as taking it as a service. We want to move along with that trend.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of 10. There is always room for improvement.