As cyber threats become more sophisticated and compliance regulations grow stricter, businesses must carefully manage who has access to their systems and data. Identity security is no longer just an IT concern—it’s a critical component of risk management and regulatory compliance. Two key identity management solutions help organizations achieve this: Identity and Access Management (IAM) and Identity Governance and Administration (IGA).
At first glance, IAM and IGA may seem interchangeable, as both deal with managing user access. However, their functions and objectives are distinct. IAM focuses on authentication and authorization, ensuring users can securely log in and access necessary resources. IGA, on the other hand, goes beyond access control to govern, monitor, and enforce compliance policies, ensuring users retain only the permissions they need over time. To dive deeper into the differences between the two, check out our blog on what sets IAM and IGA apart.
Choosing between IAM and IGA—or determining if you need both—depends on your organization’s size, security needs, regulatory requirements, and IT complexity. This blog will break down the differences between IAM and IGA, explore common challenges and solutions, and provide guidance on selecting the right approach for your business.
Organizations looking to improve identity security and compliance often ask whether they need IAM, IGA, or a combination of both. The right choice depends on business needs, security risks, and regulatory requirements. Below are key factors to consider when selecting between IAM and IGA.
The size of an organization and the complexity of its IT environment often determine whether IAM, IGA, or both are necessary.
IAM is a better fit if:
• The organization is small to mid-sized with simple access control needs.
• The focus is on authentication (MFA, SSO, etc.) and access control rather than ongoing governance.
• There are no complex compliance requirements beyond basic security policies.
IGA is necessary if:
• The business is large, highly regulated, or operates across multiple locations.
• Identity management requires automated user lifecycle management, role-based access control (RBAC), and regular compliance audits.
• There is a need for advanced access certification and policy enforcement to maintain security and compliance.
Example: A small digital marketing agency with 50 employees primarily needs IAM to provide SSO and MFA for logging into various SaaS applications. In contrast, a global financial institution with thousands of employees requires IGA to conduct regular access reviews and enforce governance policies to prevent fraud.
Certain industries require stricter access controls and governance due to legal and regulatory frameworks.
IAM is sufficient if:
• The business needs to secure user logins and prevent unauthorized access but does not require extensive auditing.
• Compliance requirements are limited to basic data security policies.
IGA is required if:
• The organization operates in highly regulated industries such as healthcare, finance, or government.
• Compliance with HIPAA, SOX, GDPR, or ISO 27001 requires detailed access tracking, separation of duties (SoD), and audit-ready reporting.
Example: A U.S. healthcare provider must follow HIPAA regulations, which require detailed user access logs and regular audits. Without IGA, the organization risks non-compliance penalties for failing to review user permissions.
Every organization has a different level of risk tolerance based on the sensitivity of its data.
IAM is sufficient if:
• The business primarily focuses on preventing unauthorized access through strong authentication (MFA, SSO, password policies, etc.).
• There are no major concerns about employees retaining unnecessary access over time.
IGA is necessary if:
• The organization needs to reduce the risk of access creep and insider threats by regularly reviewing and adjusting user permissions.
• Security teams need visibility into who has access to what and automated policy enforcement to prevent excessive privileges.
Example: A tech startup with limited sensitive data relies on IAM to prevent unauthorized access but does not require IGA. A government agency managing classified information, however, must use IGA to enforce strict security controls and revoke outdated access immediately.
Deploying IAM or IGA requires IT and security expertise.
IAM is ideal for businesses with:
• A small or mid-sized IT team that needs an out-of-the-box solution with minimal customization.
• A focus on simplifying authentication and enforcing access controls.
IGA is necessary for organizations with:
• A dedicated security team that can manage compliance requirements, access reviews, and governance workflows.
• An IT infrastructure complex enough to require automated identity lifecycle management.
Example: A retail company with a small IT staff opts for IAM with cloud-based MFA and SSO to simplify security. Meanwhile, a multinational bank employs IGA specialists to manage access certification and prevent conflicts in user roles.
IAM and IGA solutions vary in cost, and businesses must balance security needs with financial constraints.
• IAM is generally more affordable, especially cloud-based IAM platforms with pay-as-you-go pricing.
• IGA solutions require a larger investment, as they involve automating governance processes, compliance reporting, and access reviews.
Example: A growing e-commerce business with limited IT resources may choose IAM as a cost-effective way to secure its customer accounts. A pharmaceutical company, however, needs IGA to ensure strict compliance with FDA regulations, justifying the higher cost.
While IAM and IGA improve security and compliance, businesses often face challenges when adopting these systems. From technical complexities to user resistance, organizations must navigate several obstacles to fully integrate identity management solutions. Below are some of the most common challenges and strategies for overcoming them.
Many companies struggle with integrating IAM and IGA solutions into their existing infrastructure. Large organizations often have legacy systems that don’t support modern authentication or governance tools, making implementation difficult.
Example: A financial institution using a decades-old mainframe system found that integrating modern IAM solutions required custom connectors and middleware to bridge compatibility gaps. This significantly increased deployment time and costs.
Solution: Before implementation, businesses should conduct a comprehensive system audit to identify integration challenges. Choosing IAM and IGA solutions with pre-built integrations for commonly used applications, such as Azure Active Directory, can simplify the process.
While stronger authentication methods and governance controls improve security, they can also create friction for users. Employees may resist multi-factor authentication (MFA), strict password policies, or frequent access reviews, considering them inconvenient.
Example: A large healthcare provider implemented mandatory MFA for all employees but faced pushback from doctors and nurses who found the extra authentication steps disruptive during time-sensitive medical procedures.
Solution: Organizations should adopt adaptive authentication, which assesses risk factors—such as location, device, and user behavior—to determine whether additional verification is needed. This allows employees to bypass MFA when using trusted devices but requires additional security steps if a login attempt appears suspicious.
With more employees working remotely and businesses relying on external vendors, securing access beyond corporate networks has become a challenge. Many organizations fail to properly manage temporary access, leading to over-permissioned accounts or inactive credentials that remain accessible long after they should be revoked.
Example: A manufacturing company may hire third-party IT contractors for a short-term project. Without proper policies in place, these vendor account could remain active even after the contract ends, posing a serious security risk.
Solution: Implement time-bound access policies that automatically expire after a set period. Organizations should also conduct regular access reviews to ensure external users no longer have access once their engagement ends.
Learn more about reducing external access threats in our guide on mitigating third-party identity risks.
Businesses in regulated industries must meet strict identity governance and access management standards, such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. However, compliance requirements often change, making it difficult to maintain up-to-date governance policies.
Example: A multinational retail company operating in multiple countries had to adjust its IGA policies frequently to comply with different regional data protection laws, requiring constant updates to access review processes.
Solution: Organizations should automate compliance reporting by using IGA solutions that generate audit-ready reports. This reduces manual workload and ensures continuous compliance with evolving regulations.
Without proper governance, employees may accumulate excessive permissions over time as they change roles or take on new responsibilities. This increases security risks, especially if former permissions are not revoked when no longer needed.
Example: A mid-sized insurance firm conducted an access audit and discovered that employees still had access to applications they hadn’t used in over a year, increasing potential attack surfaces for cybercriminals.
Solution: Implement role-based access control (RBAC) and enforce periodic access reviews. IGA platforms can automatically flag inactive permissions, ensuring employees only retain necessary access.
IAM and IGA solutions require significant investment in software, infrastructure, and staff training. Small and mid-sized companies may find the costs of enterprise-level IAM/IGA tools prohibitive.
Example: A startup wanted to implement a full IAM and IGA solution but found that enterprise software licensing fees and implementation costs exceeded their budget.
Solution: Businesses should explore cloud-based IAM and IGA solutions, which offer scalable pricing models. Instead of investing in expensive on-premises deployments, cloud-based identity management services reduce infrastructure costs and provide automatic updates.
Identity and Access Management (IAM) focuses on authentication and authorization, ensuring users can securely access systems. It manages who can log in and what they can access through tools like Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA), Single Sign-On (SSO), and Role-Based Access Control (RBAC). If you’re new to IAM, read more about why Identity and Access Management is important.
Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) provides oversight, compliance, and lifecycle management. It ensures users only have necessary access, automates access reviews, enforces policies, and generates audit reports to meet regulatory requirements.
IAM answers: "Who can access what?"
IGA answers: "Should this user still have access?"
Not necessarily. A company’s needs depend on its size, security risks, and compliance requirements. Larger enterprises typically use both IAM and IGA together to ensure secure access and proper governance.
IGA automates compliance by:
• Conducting periodic access reviews to ensure permissions are appropriate.
• Enforcing Separation of Duties (SoD) to prevent conflicts in user roles.
• Generating audit-ready reports to meet HIPAA, SOX, GDPR, and ISO 27001 standards.
Without IGA, companies must manually review access logs, which is time-consuming and prone to human error.
Without IAM and IGA, businesses face risks such as:
• Unauthorized access: Weak authentication allows cybercriminals to exploit stolen credentials.
• Access creep: Employees accumulate excessive permissions over time, increasing security vulnerabilities.
• Orphaned accounts: Former employees’ access remains active, creating potential backdoors for attackers.
• Compliance violations: Failure to track and govern access can lead to fines and legal penalties.
• IAM can be implemented in weeks or months, depending on the size of the organization and authentication methods (SSO, MFA, RBAC).
• IGA requires more time (several months to a year) since it involves policy enforcement, access certifications, compliance automation, and audit setup.
IAM and IGA serve different but complementary roles in identity security. While IAM secures access in real time, IGA ensures long-term governance, compliance, and policy enforcement. Organizations must assess business size, compliance needs, security risks, and IT resources to determine the right approach.
Have more questions about IAM and IGA? Contact us at info@anomalix.com to explore solutions tailored to your business needs.
