A Resolver replacement should preserve the relationships the organisation actually uses across obligations, risks, controls, assessments, incidents, issues, and remediation. If those connections matter, compare Resolver with integrated GRC platforms. If they do not, a narrower compliance product may be enough.
Resolver’s compliance management product is positioned around obligations, controls, assessments, regulatory change, issues, and reporting in a wider risk context.
What Resolver still does well
Resolver remains relevant when compliance and operational risk teams need a shared model and when risk information from incidents, controls, and assessments informs real decisions.
Keep it when the organisation benefits from those relationships. Replacing a broad system because one evidence request is awkward can create a more expensive data and governance problem.
Best Resolver replacements
| Alternative | Best when | Main tradeoff |
|---|---|---|
| MetricStream | Regulatory change, content, and enterprise GRC depth lead the program | Substantial implementation and governance requirements |
| Riskonnect | Compliance should sit beside broad enterprise and operational risk | Platform breadth may exceed a compliance-only need |
| ServiceNow GRC | Risk work belongs on an existing enterprise workflow and data platform | Platform dependence and specialist configuration |
| LogicGate | Configurable applications and adaptable risk workflows are priorities | More solution design sits with the customer |
| AuditBoard | Internal audit, controls assurance, and IT risk drive adoption | Different fit for operational-risk-led programs |
Resolver alternatives by program shape
Choose MetricStream for regulatory-content-heavy enterprise compliance. Choose Riskonnect when the replacement must retain broad risk relationships.
Choose ServiceNow GRC when the organisation already has ServiceNow platform ownership and wants common workflow infrastructure. Choose LogicGate for configurable GRC applications. Choose AuditBoard when assurance functions are the primary users.
When to keep Resolver
Keep Resolver when:
- compliance and risk teams share data and workflow
- obligations are mapped to controls and accountable owners
- issues and incidents feed meaningful risk reporting
- assessment history and evidence remain useful
- the organisation can govern configuration and taxonomy
Before replacement, inventory obligations, controls, risks, assessments, incidents, issues, evidence, integrations, reports, permissions, retention, and historical records.
Resolver versus a focused custom workflow
Keep Resolver as the system of record and replace one interaction surface when the friction is:
- compliance-review intake
- evidence collection from business owners
- assessment follow-up
- exception approval
- remediation sign-off
The focused workflow should make the human task simpler while returning structured status, evidence, and decisions to Resolver.
Resolver replacement decision
Choose another integrated GRC platform when Resolver’s product or implementation model is the mismatch. Narrow the stack when the wider risk relationships are no longer needed. Keep Resolver and improve one workflow when the shared risk record remains valuable.
Continue with Best compliance management software, Compliance workflow sprawl, or Compliance review workflow: how to automate it.
Choose a discovery route
If interviews, source material, record ownership, controls, or migration need structured review, explore Deep Discovery. It can investigate whether to keep, integrate, migrate, or own records without presuming replacement is safe. Deep Discovery is currently available through a limited account-enabled rollout.
