Score It, Don’t Read It: A Smarter Way to Compare GRC Systems
                     G O V E R N A N C E ,  R I S K  M A N A G E M E N T  &  C O M P L I A N C E
Score It, Don't Read It
A weighted scoring method for comparing GRC systems in Australia
www.sentrient.com.au
T H E  Q U I C K  A N S W E R
Comparing GRC systems works when you score them rather than read 
about them
8–12 ~50% 3 = live 5%
criteria, no more of weight on 2–3 rows demonstrated, not claimed the dead heat band
Agreed and written down before you The things that actually decide the Score evidence you have watched Inside it, decide on support, exit 
see a demonstration outcome for your organisation on a 0 to 5 scale terms and who you would ring at 
6pm
Reading feature lists and picking what felt best is not a comparison. It is a preference, formed mostly by whichever vendor 
presented last.
www.sentrient.com.au
S E C T I O N  0 1
Why most GRC system comparisons fail
On the surface most platforms are identical. The differences surface during implementation, which is the most expensive possible moment to discover them.
Every system scores well, because a feature list records what exists rather than how well it works or how many clicks it 
Comparing feature lists
takes
You compare presenters. The best demonstration is often from the vendor with the best pre-sales team rather than the best 
Comparing demonstrations
product
Criteria that matter and criteria that do not are counted equally, so a system can win on twelve things nobody cares about
No agreed weighting
Criteria get invented to justify a preference already formed, which is how a decision becomes impossible to explain to a 
Scoring after the fact
board six months later
Ignoring Australian fit A powerful global system that models the wrong obligations creates manual workarounds that outlive the project
2 min Ask the vendor to show a manager, not an administrator, completing the single most frequent task. If it takes more than about two 
minutes and needs training to attempt, adoption will be the problem regardless of what the platform can do.
ADOPTION TEST
www.sentrient.com.au
The method in six steps
Steps one to three happen before you speak to a vendor. That is what stops the scorecard being written around a product you already like.
Define what you need it to achieve Identify who will actually use it
1 2
Not features. Outcomes: less audit preparation, training completion Compliance needs workflow and evidence, risk owners need speed, 
evidenced by site, a board risk view that changes a decision managers need to report without training, executives need a readable 
report
Set scope, maturity and weights Shortlist to three
3 4
Write them down before any demonstration. The step that gets skipped, Use the scorecard's hard gates before spending time on demonstrations
and the one that makes the rest work
Run structured demonstrations Score independently, then compare
5 6
And a proof of concept where possible, using your own scenarios and Each stakeholder scores before the group discusses. Discussion first 
your own data rather than the vendor's sample produces one loud person's opinion with extra steps
Involving compliance, risk, operations and leadership early surfaces problems while they are still inexpensive and builds the buy-in that decides 
whether anyone uses the system after go-live.
www.sentrient.com.au
T H E  S C O R E C A R D
Twelve criteria, weighted to 100 Functional — 55 Fit & practical — 45
Policy and governance management 10 Australian obligation coverage 10
Risk management 10 Data hosting and sovereignty 5
Compliance and obligation management 10 Local support and expertise 5
Incident and issue management 10 Ease of use and adoption 12
Reporting and dashboards 8 Implementation effort and time to value 7
Audit and assurance 7 Three-year total cost 6
The weights total 100 and are a starting point, not a rule. Roughly half the total Ease of use carries the largest single weight because it is scored last and felt 
should sit on the two or three criteria that genuinely decide the outcome for you and first. Every other row describes what the system can do; this one decides whether 
they must be agreed before the first demonstration. it gets done.
www.sentrient.com.au
S C O R I N G  A N D  G A T E S
Score what you watched, and gate before you score
THE 0 TO 5 SCALE FOUR HARD GATES - PASS OR FAIL
0 Not available. Vendor confirms it does not do this Data hosted in Australia
If you hold personal or sensitive information and have decided this is a 
1 On the roadmap. Named release, in writing. A roadmap is not a capability requirement
2 Custom configuration or a partner. Confirmed in writing, with effort and 
Your sector's core obligation supported
cost stated Without custom development - reportable incidents, screening currency or a 
prudential standard
3 Demonstrated live. You watched it work. The baseline for a real capability, and the honest middle of the scale Data export in a usable format
Confirmed in writing, so leaving is possible
4 Demonstrated with your data. A proof of concept, or a demo built on your actual use case
Support hours cover your operating hours
Particularly with obligations that carry short response clocks
5 Confirmed in production. A reference customer at your size, in your sector
3 max Beyond three systems, scoring quality drops and the 
process stalls. Gates cut the list before demonstrations.
www.sentrient.com.au
M A K E  I T  Y O U R S
Move the weights, then score the local rows specifically
IF YOU ARE NOT A MID-SIZED EMPLOYER AUSTRALIAN ROWS WORTH THEIR OWN SCORE
Small, no compliance team Work health and safety Privacy
Raise ease of use to 18, implementation to 10, cost to 10. Lower audit to 4, Duties, notifiable incidents, and Privacy Act, the Notifiable Data 
reporting to 5 psychosocial hazards in the same Breaches clock, cross-border disclosure 
register as physical ones if data leaves Australia
Aged care, disability or NDIS
Raise Australian coverage to 15, incidents to 13. Lower reporting to 6, audit to 5 Fair work Whistleblower
Record keeping, and evidence that A confidential route, investigation 
Financial services under CPS 230 survives a request years later handling, and confidentiality that holds 
in practice
Raise risk to 15, audit to 12, reporting to 11. Lower ease of use to 8, cost to 4
Sector obligations Risk framework alignment
Government or sensitive data
Aged care and NDIS standards, child ISO 31000 or your framework reflected 
Raise hosting to 12, local support to 8. Lower cost to 4, implementation to 5 safe standards, CPS 230, charity in how the register actually works
governance
Weak answers sound like "we are GDPR compliant" and "fully configurable" - a different 
regime, and a build you will pay for.
www.sentrient.com.au
E V I D E N C E ,  N O T  C L A I M S
Run the same four scenarios with every vendor
SCENARIO 01 SCENARIO 02
One worker, one obligation, one date An incident, report to closed action
Ask them to produce the evidence live and time it. This single task tests policy, Reported by a manager on a phone, not by an administrator on a laptop.
training, records and reporting at once.
SCENARIO 03 SCENARIO 04
A regulatory change arrives The report your board actually receives
Show adding the obligation, assigning owners and reporting on completion - and Not a sample dashboard. Ask what a board pack looks like and how long it takes 
note how much of it needs the vendor. to produce.
"Is that available today, in the version we would be buying, without custom development?" Ask it every time something impressive appears. The answer 
changes a score from a 3 to a 1 more often than most buyers expect, and it is much harder to ask after you have signed.
www.sentrient.com.au
W O R K E D  E X A M P L E ,  3 0 0  P E O P L E  A C R O S S  4  S I T E S
The better product and the better purchase are not the same 
system System A - global enterpriseSystem B - Australian-built
275 212
TOTAL OUT OF 500
175 System A 357
82
System B 387
A gap of 30 points, or 6% . Real, but not a 
Functional subtotal Fit and practical subtotal landslide.
55 weight points, 275 available 45 weight points, 225 available
B +36 B +30 B +39 A +30
Ease of use - A needed an administrator Australian coverage - A modelled Implementation and cost - A quoted more Reporting and audit - genuinely better, if 
for the manager task obligations as custom fields than its first-year licence the depth gets used
www.sentrient.com.au
T H E  B O T T O M  L I N E
Score, weight, gate - then decide on the tie-breakers
01 Score, do not read: A feature comparison rewards breadth; a weighted 
WITHIN 5%, USE THESE
scorecard rewards fit
02 Exit terms: export format, notice period and retention, in writingWeights before demonstrations: Otherwise, the criteria get written 
around the product you already liked Who owns configuration: what your team can change without a ticket
03 Half the weight on two or three rows: Evenly spread weights mean you The support line: ring it during the evaluation and time the answer
have not decided what matters The nearest reference: ask what they would do differently
04 Score independently, then compare: Disagreement between scorers is Your least engaged manager: adoption is decided by the reluctant
the most useful output of the process
Sentrient brings policies, risk, incidents, obligations and compliance training together 
for Australian organisations, hosted locally. Bring your scorecard to the demonstration 
Explore the GRC system Book a free demonstration
and ask us to produce evidence for one worker and one obligation while you time it.
www.sentrient.com.au