Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
06/06/2026 11:28 am
TL;DR: Active users, new versus returning users, and organization-level engagement are now surfaced directly inside AuthKit by AuthKit Analytics, replacing custom event wiring and third-party dashboards for teams that need a quick read on growth patterns, according to WorkOS. The real governance value is clearer visibility into authentication behaviour, but it does not remove the need for a separate identity analytics and control model.
NHIMG editorial — what this means for NHI practitioners
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should teams use authentication analytics without confusing it with governance?
A: Treat authentication analytics as an input to governance, not as governance itself.
Q: Why do organisation-level identity metrics matter in B2B environments?
A: Because access and adoption usually happen at tenant level, not just at the individual user level.
Q: What breaks when authentication data lives only in separate analytics tools?
A: Teams can end up with mismatched definitions, delayed signals, and duplicated reporting logic.
Practitioner guidance
- Define which authentication metrics are governance signals Map active users, returning users, and organisation growth to specific reviews such as onboarding progress, account expansion, or dormant-tenant checks.
- Compare built-in and external reporting sources Validate that identity metrics in the dashboard match what your analytics or data warehouse sees before using them for operational reporting.
- Use organisation-level trends to trigger lifecycle review Flag customers with high sign-up volume but low returning usage for outreach, entitlement review, or access model adjustment.
What's in the full announcement
WorkOS's full post covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- The exact AuthKit dashboard views for active, new, and returning users
- How to navigate the WorkOS dashboard to reach analytics inside Authentication
- The product workflow for comparing organisation-level activity across customers
- The built-in reporting experience teams can use instead of wiring external event pipelines
👉 Read WorkOS's AuthKit Analytics post on user growth and organisation insights →
Authkit analytics for user growth: what IAM teams should watch?
Explore further
06/06/2026 12:18 pm
Identity analytics is becoming part of the governance surface, not just the reporting layer. When authentication data is visible only through external tools, teams tend to treat it as product telemetry and miss the identity governance signal. Built-in metrics on signups, returns, and organisation growth can help surface account health, but they also blur the boundary between usage reporting and access oversight. Practitioners should treat this as a governance input, not a finished control.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 72% of organisations have experienced or suspect they have experienced a breach of non-human identities, according to The 2024 ESG Report: Managing Non-Human Identities.
- Enterprises that have experienced a compromised NHI averaged 2.7 separate incidents in the past 12 months, which shows how quickly identity exposure can repeat once governance is weak.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can security and product teams align on identity usage reporting?
A: Start by agreeing on the same metric definitions, then tie each metric to a specific business or governance action. For example, a drop in returning users might trigger customer success follow-up, while organisation growth might trigger entitlement review. Shared definitions prevent conflicting interpretations of the same identity data.
👉 Read our full editorial: Authkit analytics puts authentication growth data into view
