Identity Governance and Administration Vs Identity and Access Management

Identity Governance and Administration Vs Identity and Access Management

In this article we discuss the nuanced differences and complementary roles of Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) and Identity and Access Management (IAM) is crucial for organizations aiming to secure their digital environments effectively. We delves into each framework’s core functions, advantages, and scenarios where one may be favored over the other, providing a comprehensive comparison for businesses looking to implement or refine their identity management strategies.

Table of Contents

What is the Main Difference Identity Governance and Administration and Identity and Access Management?

The main difference between Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) and Identity and Access Management (IAM) is that IGA focuses on defining and implementing policies and processes that manage and govern user identities and their access rights within an organization, whereas IAM is concerned with the technical implementation of user identity verification and granting or denying access to resources based on those identities.

What is Identity Governance and Administration and What is Identity and Access Management?

Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) is a framework that helps organizations manage and secure user identities and their access to various resources. It involves defining and enforcing policies and procedures that ensure the right individuals have access to the right resources at the right times for the right reasons. IGA includes tasks like role management, compliance management, and audit reporting.

On the other hand, Identity and Access Management (IAM) is the set of technologies and policies designed to ensure that the right individuals have access to the technical resources they need at the right times. IAM systems provide tools for managing user identities, credentials, and access rights, automating the provisioning and de-provisioning of accounts, and monitoring and securing access to resources.

Key Differences Between Identity Governance and Administration and Identity and Access Management

  1. Scope: IGA has a broader scope, encompassing policy setting, compliance, and governance, while IAM focuses on the technical aspects of providing and managing access.
  2. Focus: IGA is more concerned with ensuring compliance and governance, whereas IAM focuses on the technical mechanisms for user authentication and authorization.
  3. Processes: IGA involves defining and enforcing policies and processes around identity and access, while IAM deals with the execution of these policies.
  4. Compliance: IGA plays a crucial role in compliance management, ensuring that access rights comply with regulatory standards, whereas IAM provides the tools to enforce these compliance requirements.
  5. Integration: IGA requires integration with various business processes to ensure governance policies are upheld, while IAM integrates with different technologies to manage access to resources.
  6. User Lifecycle Management: IGA is concerned with the entire user lifecycle, including role changes and offboarding, whereas IAM focuses on providing and revoking access as needed.
  7. Auditing and Reporting: IGA provides comprehensive auditing and reporting capabilities for governance purposes, while IAM focuses on monitoring and reporting access-related activities.
  8. Decision Making: IGA involves strategic decision-making regarding access policies and governance, while IAM is more operational, focusing on implementing those decisions.

Key Similarities Between Identity Governance and Administration and Identity and Access Management

  1. Security Focus: Both IGA and IAM prioritize the security of user identities and access to resources.
  2. User Identity Management: Both frameworks involve managing user identities, including creating, updating, and deleting user accounts.
  3. Access Control: Both IGA and IAM play crucial roles in controlling access to organizational resources, ensuring users have appropriate access rights.
  4. Automation: Both frameworks leverage automation to streamline the management of identities and access rights, reducing manual errors and improving efficiency.
  5. Policy Enforcement: IGA and IAM enforce policies related to user access, ensuring that these policies are consistently applied across the organization.
  6. Risk Management: Both IGA and IAM contribute to risk management by identifying and mitigating potential security risks related to user access.

Advantages of Identity Governance and Administration Over Identity and Access Management

  1. Comprehensive Policy Enforcement: IGA offers more thorough policy enforcement, ensuring that access rights align with organizational policies and compliance requirements.
  2. Better Compliance Management: IGA provides better tools and processes for managing compliance with various regulatory standards, helping organizations avoid penalties.
  3. Enhanced Visibility: With IGA, organizations gain enhanced visibility into user access and activities, which aids in detecting and responding to potential security issues.
  4. Strategic Role Management: IGA allows for more strategic management of user roles, ensuring that access rights are aligned with job functions and reducing excess privileges.
  5. Detailed Auditing and Reporting: IGA offers more detailed auditing and reporting capabilities, facilitating better decision-making and compliance with audit requirements.
  6. Improved Risk Management: By providing a comprehensive view of access patterns and user activities, IGA improves an organization’s ability to identify and mitigate risks.

Disadvantages of Identity Governance and Administration Compared to Identity and Access Management

  1. Higher Complexity: IGA solutions can be more complex to implement and manage compared to IAM, requiring more resources and expertise.
  2. Increased Costs: The comprehensive nature of IGA solutions often results in higher initial and ongoing costs compared to IAM systems.
  3. Longer Implementation Time: Setting up an IGA framework can take longer due to its extensive features and integrations with various business processes.
  4. Potential for Overhead: The detailed processes and policies of IGA might introduce additional overhead, potentially slowing down certain business operations.
  5. Demand for Skilled Personnel: Effectively managing an IGA system often requires personnel with specialized skills, which can be a challenge to find and retain.

Advantages of Identity and Access Management Over Identity Governance and Administration

  1. Simpler Implementation: IAM systems are generally simpler to implement, requiring less time and fewer resources compared to IGA solutions.
  2. Lower Costs: IAM solutions are typically less expensive to acquire and maintain, making them more accessible for a broader range of organizations.
  3. Operational Efficiency: With a focus on managing access, IAM systems can quickly adapt to changes in user status, improving operational efficiency.
  4. Technical Focus: IAM provides a strong technical foundation for managing user access, which is crucial for securing resources and data.
  5. Rapid Response: IAM systems often allow for quicker responses to access-related issues, minimizing potential security breaches or downtime.
  6. User-centric Features: IAM systems usually offer user-centric features like self-service password reset, enhancing user convenience and reducing IT workload.

Disadvantages of Identity and Access Management Compared to Identity Governance and Administration

  1. Limited Policy Management: IAM lacks the comprehensive policy management features of IGA, which can be a drawback for organizations with complex compliance needs.
  2. Lesser Focus on Compliance: Without the extensive compliance management features of IGA, IAM may not be sufficient for organizations with stringent regulatory requirements.
  3. Reduced Visibility: IAM systems might not provide the same level of visibility into user access and activities as IGA systems, potentially impacting security monitoring.
  4. Narrower Scope: The scope of IAM is more limited, focusing primarily on access management without the broader governance context of IGA.
  5. Minimal Role Management: While IAM handles access, it may not offer the same level of role management and governance as IGA, which can lead to challenges in managing user roles effectively.
  6. Limited Auditing and Reporting: IAM systems typically offer less comprehensive auditing and reporting features compared to IGA, which can be a limitation for organizations requiring detailed access records.

Situations When Identity Governance and Administration is Preferable to Identity and Access Management

  1. Regulatory Compliance: In environments where compliance with strict regulatory standards is essential, IGA’s comprehensive policy and compliance management features make it the better choice.
  2. Complex User Roles: Organizations with complex user roles and hierarchies benefit from IGA’s robust role management and governance capabilities.
  3. Risk Management: For businesses focusing on detailed risk assessment and mitigation strategies related to user access, IGA provides the necessary tools and visibility.
  4. Audit and Reporting Needs: When detailed audit trails and reporting are crucial for operational transparency and compliance, IGA’s advanced capabilities are more suitable.
  5. Policy-driven Environments: In settings where access decisions must be guided by comprehensive policy frameworks, IGA’s policy management features are essential.
  6. Mergers and Acquisitions: During mergers and acquisitions, IGA helps in aligning and governing the access rights and roles across the merging entities effectively.

Situations When Identity and Access Management is Preferable to Identity Governance and Administration

  1. Rapid Deployment: In scenarios requiring quick setup and deployment of access management solutions, IAM’s simpler implementation is advantageous.
  2. Cost-sensitive Environments: For organizations with limited budgets, the lower cost of IAM systems makes them a more viable option.
  3. Operational Agility: When a business needs to adapt quickly to changes in user access requirements, IAM’s operational focus offers greater flexibility.
  4. Technical Focus: In situations where the primary concern is the technical control of access, rather than governance or compliance, IAM is more appropriate.
  5. SMEs with Simpler Structures: Small to medium-sized enterprises with less complex access management needs might find IAM more suitable and easier to manage.
  6. User-centric Features: Organizations prioritizing user convenience, such as self-service options for password management, will find IAM systems more aligned with their needs.

Integrating Identity Governance and Administration with Business Processes

Before delving deeper, it’s important to understand how integrating IGA with business processes can enhance organizational efficiency and security.

Aligning IGA with Business Objectives

Effective integration of IGA with business processes ensures that access rights and roles align with the organization’s objectives and operational needs. This alignment aids in minimizing unnecessary access while ensuring that employees have the rights they need to perform their roles effectively, thereby improving productivity and reducing security risks.

Streamlining Compliance and Audit Processes

Integrating IGA also simplifies compliance and audit processes. By establishing clear governance structures and access policies, organizations can more easily demonstrate compliance with various regulations. This integration not only helps in avoiding potential penalties but also in establishing a culture of accountability and transparency within the organization.

Enhancing Risk Management Strategies

The incorporation of IGA into business processes enhances risk management by providing a comprehensive view of who has access to what resources and why. This visibility allows for better detection of potential risks, quicker responses to incidents, and more informed decision-making regarding access rights and security policies.

Balancing Technical and Governance Aspects in Identity Management

Understanding the balance between technical and governance aspects is crucial for effective identity management.

Technical Implementation of IAM

The technical implementation of IAM focuses on the mechanisms and technologies used to manage user access. This includes authentication, authorization, provisioning, and monitoring of user activities. By concentrating on these aspects, organizations can ensure that their resources are protected against unauthorized access.

Governance Role of IGA

On the other hand, the governance role of IGA is about establishing the framework within which access is managed. This includes setting policies, defining roles, ensuring compliance, and overseeing the entire lifecycle of user access. Governance ensures that technical measures align with business objectives and compliance requirements.

Finding the Right Balance

Balancing the technical aspects of IAM with the governance provided by IGA is key to effective identity management. While IAM ensures that access control measures are in place and functioning, IGA ensures that these measures are in line with the broader goals and policies of the organization. Together, they provide a comprehensive approach to managing and securing access to resources.


How does IGA contribute to business efficiency?

IGA contributes to business efficiency by ensuring that access rights are aligned with employee roles and responsibilities, reducing the risk of access-related errors and improving the speed at which users can perform their duties. By automating access control and compliance processes, IGA also reduces the administrative burden on IT teams, allowing them to focus on other critical tasks.

Can IAM systems operate independently of IGA frameworks?

Yes, IAM systems can operate independently of IGA frameworks, focusing solely on the technical aspects of access management, such as authentication and authorization. However, integrating IAM with IGA provides a more holistic approach to identity and access management, aligning technical controls with broader governance and compliance objectives.

How does IGA handle changes in user roles or employment status?

IGA systems monitor and manage changes in user roles or employment status by automatically updating access rights. When a user’s role changes or they leave the organization, IGA ensures that their access privileges are adjusted or revoked accordingly, maintaining security and compliance.

What role does IAM play in preventing security breaches?

IAM plays a critical role in preventing security breaches by ensuring that only authorized users can access sensitive systems and data. By managing user credentials and controlling access based on predefined policies, IAM systems reduce the risk of unauthorized access, data breaches, and other security incidents.

How do organizations measure the effectiveness of their IGA strategies?

Organizations measure the effectiveness of their IGA strategies by assessing compliance with access policies, the efficiency of user access management processes, the speed of responding to access-related incidents, and the ability to meet audit and compliance requirements.

In what scenarios is IAM preferred over IGA for small businesses?

For small businesses with simpler structures and less stringent compliance requirements, IAM might be preferred over IGA due to its lower cost, simpler implementation, and straightforward management, providing essential access control functionalities without the complexity of full-scale governance.

How do IGA and IAM interact with other security systems within an organization?

IGA and IAM interact with other security systems within an organization by sharing information on user identities, roles, and access activities. This integration helps in creating a comprehensive security posture that encompasses not just access control but also other aspects like data security, network security, and threat detection.

Can IGA assist in detecting insider threats?

IGA can assist in detecting insider threats by providing detailed logs and reports on user access and activities, helping organizations identify unusual or unauthorized actions that could indicate a threat from within. By analyzing patterns and correlating data, IGA systems can alert administrators to potential insider threats, facilitating prompt investigation and response.

Identity Governance and Administration vs Identity and Access Management Summary

The exploration of Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) and Identity and Access Management (IAM) in this article sheds light on their distinctive and overlapping aspects, illustrating the value they bring to organizational security and efficiency. While IGA focuses on the governance, compliance, and management aspects of identity access, IAM addresses the technical execution of access control. Understanding their respective advantages and optimal application scenarios helps organizations tailor their approach to identity management, ensuring both robust security and operational effectiveness. This article offers a foundation for businesses to make informed decisions in implementing or enhancing their IGA and IAM strategies, contributing to a secure and efficient digital environment.

FeatureIdentity Governance and Administration (IGA)Identity and Access Management (IAM)
ScopeBroader, encompassing policy setting, compliance, and governanceFocused on the technical aspects of user identity verification and access control
Main FocusEnsuring compliance and governance, managing user roles, and audit reportingTechnical mechanisms for user authentication and authorization
ComplianceCentral to its function, ensuring access rights comply with regulationsProvides tools to enforce compliance but less focused on governance
IntegrationRequires integration with business processes for governancePrimarily integrates with technologies to manage access
User Lifecycle ManagementManages entire user lifecycle, including role changes and offboardingConcentrates on providing and revoking access as needed
Auditing and ReportingComprehensive capabilities for governance purposesFocused on access-related activities
Decision MakingInvolves strategic decision-making regarding policies and governanceMore operational, focusing on implementing access decisions
ProsEnhanced policy enforcement, better compliance management, improved risk managementSimpler implementation, lower costs, operational efficiency
ConsHigher complexity, increased costs, potential for overheadLimited policy management, lesser focus on compliance, reduced visibility
SituationsBetter suited for environments with complex user roles, stringent regulatory compliance, and detailed audit requirementsPreferable for rapid deployment, cost-sensitive environments, and when technical control of access is a primary concern
Identity Governance and Administration vs Identity and Access Management Summary

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top


Enter your contact details and I will get in touch!


Send a Message. I will respond quickly!

Try QuickBooks free for 30 days

Get started with QuickBooks in 30 minutes*.

*Based on a survey of small businesses using QuickBook Online conducted September 2018.