Topic starter
10/06/2026 9:12 pm
TL;DR: Software asset management tools are positioned to help organisations discover applications, track renewals, optimise license spend, and support onboarding and offboarding, according to Zluri’s review of 13 tools. The deeper issue is that SaaS governance is now an identity problem as much as a procurement problem, because unmanaged app sprawl creates access, compliance, and lifecycle risk.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Zluri: “13 Best Software Asset Management Tools in 2026”.
Key questions
Q: How should IAM and SaaS teams share responsibility for app offboarding?
A: IAM should own the lifecycle logic for access removal, while SaaS operations should supply the usage and contract context that proves whether access is still needed.
Q: Why does application discovery alone not solve software governance?
A: Discovery tells you what exists, but it does not tell you who approved it, who owns it, or whether access was ever removed.
Q: Why do SaaS management gaps often turn into access governance problems?
A: Because the same blind spots that hide rogue apps also hide who can use them.
Practitioner guidance
- Strengthen SaaS discovery coverage Validate that your discovery stack pulls from SSO, finance, APIs, and optional endpoint signals so unsanctioned apps do not stay invisible.
- Tie app requests to identity lifecycle Ensure approval, assignment, and revocation are triggered by joiner, mover, and leaver events rather than handled as standalone admin work.
- Separate spend optimisation from access decisions Use licence usage and renewal data to prioritise review, but confirm entitlement ownership before terminating or retaining an application.
Bottom line: SAM tools help organisations see and rationalise software spend, but they do not on their own govern the identities that use those applications.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
10/06/2026 10:02 pm
Software asset management has become a proxy layer for identity governance in SaaS estates. The article shows that the operational value of SAM now depends on whether it can connect discovery, requests, approvals, assignment, and revocation. That is an identity lifecycle problem wearing an asset-management label. Practitioners should stop treating SAM and IGA as separate domains when the control failure emerges in the same application path.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How do software asset management and IGA work together in practice?
A: SAM should supply application discovery, usage, and renewal context, while IGA should enforce ownership, approvals, recertification, and removal. Used together, they create a closed loop from request to revocation. Used separately, they leave gaps where applications can be purchased, assigned, and forgotten without a durable governance record.
👉 Read our full editorial: Software asset management tools expose the limits of app governance
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group