The Hidden Complexity Behind “Just Buy an IAM Tool”
Why technology-first IAM decisions increase risk - and what to validate before investing.
In this article
Why IAM initiatives struggle even with strong technology choices, how complexity emerges when readiness is overlooked, and why validating organisational maturity is essential before committing to IAM or IGA platforms.
IAM Fails on Readiness, Not on Technology
When identity risks surface, organisations often move fast. An IAM or IGA platform is shortlisted, budgets are discussed, and implementation plans follow.
The assumption is modern tooling will address access risk, governance gaps, and compliance pressure. In practice, many IAM programmes stall or require costly rework. The issue is rarely the product. It is the decision to invest before confirming organisational readiness.
“IAM is not a product deployment. It is an operating model that spans the organisation.”
To do: assess your current IAM readiness before selecting technology.
Why IAM Procurement Looks Simpler Than It Is
IAM platforms showcase mature capabilities – lifecycle automation, access reviews, policy enforcement, and broad integration. On paper, adoption appears straightforward.
In reality, these capabilities depend on conditions that are often missing. Ownership is fragmented. Role models vary by application. JML processes differ across regions or business units. Identity data lacks consistency. Legacy integrations limit automation.
None of this is visible during vendor demonstrations. It only becomes apparent once the platform is deployed.
“Technology exposes complexity; it does not remove it.”
To do: understand which organisational gaps would limit IAM adoption.
Where Complexity Surfaces After Implementation Begins
Once implementation starts, friction emerges quickly. Access models fail to reflect reality. Automation assumes consistency that does not exist. Approval workflows stall because accountability was never formally defined.
At the same time, identity data becomes a constraint. Inaccurate attributes weaken policy enforcement and increase exceptions, forcing teams into manual workarounds. Delivery slows. Operational cost rises.
At this point, IAM is often labelled complex or expensive. The technology is blamed, but the root cause sits upstream.
To do: Identify the root causes before they surface mid-project.
The Investment Risk of Technology-First IAM
Skipping readiness validation exposes organisations to avoidable risk. Capabilities are purchased without the ability to operate them. Timelines stretch. Manual fixes become permanent. Compliance objectives drift.
Most critically, executive confidence erodes. IAM begins to look like an open-ended initiative rather than a strategic control layer.
“Assuming technology can compensate for structural gaps is the fastest way to inflate IAM risk.”
To do: reduce IAM investment risk with an evidence-based baseline.
IAM as an Operating Model
Effective IAM depends on alignment across three dimensions:
- Processes must be defined, repeatable, and enforceable.
- People must have clear ownership and decision rights.
- Technology must enable automation without masking organisational ambiguity.
When these elements are misaligned, the platform absorbs the complexity. When assessed together, IAM becomes predictable and scalable.
To do: Review how your IAM operating model performs across these dimensions.
From Assumptions to Evidence
Before committing to any IAM or IGA solution, leadership needs a validated view of the current state. This includes how identity processes actually operate, where accountability breaks down, which data dependencies exist, and how much change the organisation can absorb.
“A baseline does not slow progress. It prevents mis-sequencing.”
A structured, vendor-agnostic maturity evaluation replaces assumptions with evidence. It clarifies operational risk, identifies priorities, and distinguishes what is feasible now from what should follow later.
To do: request an independent IAM maturity evaluation.
From Tool Selection to Organisational Readiness
“Just buy an IAM tool” underestimates the organisational complexity of identity. Technology is essential, but readiness determines outcomes.
By validating maturity across processes, people, and technology before procurement, security leaders reduce investment risk and position IAM as a durable control layer.