A company moves GRC from spreadsheets to an automated platform in 6 steps, taken in order: inventory the controls and the evidence behind them, map each control once to every framework, connect the systems that hold the evidence, give every control a named owner, run the platform beside the spreadsheet for one audit cycle, and then retire the spreadsheet.
The order matters because each step feeds the next. A platform connected before the controls are inventoried automates the spreadsheet’s duplicates and gaps. A spreadsheet retired before a parallel cycle leaves the auditor with nothing to compare against.
Why the spreadsheet stops working
A GRC spreadsheet records what someone said about a control on the day they said it. It cannot test the control, so every audit starts the same round of evidence requests, screenshots and exports again. Each new framework adds a tab and another round for controls that were already evidenced for the last one.
Most risk teams are asked to prove continuous oversight with the staff they had for annual reviews, and the spreadsheet is where that pressure shows first. The warning signs are listed in Top 5 Signs You’ve Outgrown Your Legacy GRC Tool. The reasons enterprises replace older GRC systems are in Modern Enterprises Are Replacing Traditional GRC Systems with DigitalXForce.
Step 1. Inventory the controls and the evidence behind them
Write every control down once. For each one, record the framework requirements it answers, the system that enforces it, the evidence that proves it, and how that evidence is collected today, whether by export, screenshot or attestation.
Then remove the duplicates. The same multifactor authentication control written 3 ways for 3 frameworks is one control with 3 mappings. Controls that no system can prove, such as a background check or a board review, are marked as attested, and they stay attested after the move. The cleaned list is the baseline the platform starts from.
Step 2. Map each control once to every framework
Map each control in the baseline to every requirement it satisfies, across every framework you report against. Depending on where you operate, that can mean SOC 2 against the AICPA Trust Services Criteria, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, the NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0, DORA and NIS2. A public catalog such as NIST SP 800-53 Revision 5 or CIS Controls v8.1 can serve as the common reference that each framework maps to.
Mapping once means evidence is collected once. When a control is tested, the result counts toward every framework the control is mapped to, and a new framework reuses evidence you already hold. DigitalXForce maps each control once to 50+ compliance frameworks.
Step 3. Connect the systems that hold the evidence
Start with the controls that appear in the most frameworks and whose evidence already lives in a system. Multifactor authentication and access reviews sit in the identity provider, device compliance in the endpoint tool, encryption and configuration in the cloud platform, logging in the SIEM, and change approvals in the ticketing system. Connect those systems first.
Once a control is connected, it can be tested against live system state on a set frequency, with the evidence collected as a by-product of the test. That is the practical difference between a platform and a better spreadsheet. DigitalXForce connects through 250+ technology integrations.
Continuous Control Assurance (CCA) uses evidence, monitoring and validation to determine whether controls continue to operate as expected. Continuous Control Monitoring (CCM) monitors conditions, evidence and signals associated with controls. CCM is a capability within CCA: it reads the connected systems, and CCA uses what it finds to decide whether each control still works.
Step 4. Give every control a named owner
A spreadsheet often names a team. A platform needs a person, because a failed test has to go somewhere. For each control, set 4 things: the source of evidence, the test, the frequency and the owner, as described in Cybersecurity Mesh Architecture for Compliance and Continuous Control Monitoring.
When a test fails, the owner receives a risk to treat rather than a finding that waits for next year’s audit. People who have never owned a control before need to know what the job involves before the platform starts sending them results.
Step 5. Run the platform beside the spreadsheet for one audit cycle
Keep the spreadsheet as the record of reference for one full audit cycle, and compare the platform with the spreadsheet control by control. Each disagreement is a stale spreadsheet entry, a missing integration, a test that needs tuning or a real failure the spreadsheet never showed. Each one is worth finding before the auditor does.
Talk to the auditor before the cycle starts. Auditors still attest, so agree in advance which platform evidence they will review and in what form. This is the model DigitalXForce runs, with the module details on the AI-Powered Risk Management and Automated GRC product page.
Step 6. Retire the spreadsheet
When an audit cycle closes on platform evidence, freeze the spreadsheet as a dated, read-only archive and stop updating it. Retire the side trackers that grew up around it, so there is one record of controls, owners and evidence. Attested controls move to the platform with their dates and owners.
From then on, report posture to the board from the platform. The report follows the cadence of the tests, and the audit calendar stops setting the pace.
Where an automated platform is not the answer
A small team preparing its first SOC 2 is usually better served by a compliance automation product. Vanta says it automates SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI and GDPR compliance certification, and Drata describes its product as SOC 2 compliance automation software. For that job, a product built for it is a better fit than an enterprise platform, DigitalXForce included.
A company with one framework, a short control list and a disciplined review calendar may not need a platform at all. DigitalXForce fits a regulated enterprise that reports against several frameworks, runs many security and enterprise tools, and answers to a board or a regulator on a continuing basis. The DigitalXForce vs Drata comparison shows where that line falls.
Questions about moving GRC off spreadsheets
How long does it take to move GRC from spreadsheets to a platform?
It depends on the number of frameworks, controls and systems, so a fixed number would be a guess. The inventory in step 1 sets the pace, because the platform can only be as clean as the control list it starts from. Plan for at least one full audit cycle of parallel running before the spreadsheet is retired.
Do we have to redo our control mappings?
You redo them only where the spreadsheet maps the same control several times. Existing mappings are the starting point. Consolidating duplicates into one control mapped to every framework is the main piece of work in step 2.
What happens to controls that cannot be automated?
They stay attested. The platform records each attestation with its date and owner, so the auditor sees attested and tested controls side by side. A background check or a board review is attested whichever system holds the record.
Will our auditor accept evidence from an automated platform?
Ask before the parallel cycle starts, because the answer belongs to your auditor. Auditors still attest, and what changes is the form of the evidence: timestamped results read from the source system in place of screenshots. Agree which reports and exports they will review, and run the parallel cycle on that basis.
Should we move one framework at a time or all at once?
Map all of them in step 2, because the value of mapping comes from seeing the overlap. Connect systems in priority order in step 3, starting with the controls shared by the most frameworks. Retire the spreadsheet when every framework it carried has closed an audit cycle on platform evidence.
What is the difference between automated GRC and compliance automation?
Compliance automation products are built to get a company ready for a certification audit such as SOC 2. Automated GRC, as DigitalXForce uses the term, runs governance, risk and compliance on live evidence across many frameworks, with risk registers, owners and board reporting on the same data. The glossary entry for the Automated GRC module sets out what it covers.
Is DigitalXForce recognized as a GRC platform?
IDC named DigitalXForce a Leader in the IDC MarketScape: Worldwide Governance, Risk, and Compliance Software Vendor Assessment, 2025 (IDC document US53615325, June 2025). The IDC documents that name DigitalXForce are listed on the IDC research page.
Sources
- Vanta, home page description, which says Vanta automates SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI and GDPR compliance certification. https://www.vanta.com/, read 24 September 2026.
- Drata, SOC 2 product page, titled “SOC 2 Compliance Automation Software”. https://drata.com/product/soc-2, read 24 September 2026.
Do this once instead of every audit.
Every step above can be done by hand. DigitalXForce does them continuously, maps the result to 50+ frameworks once, and keeps the evidence current between audits. A 30 minute walkthrough on your own framework set shows what that removes from your calendar.
