Topic starter
23/06/2026 9:18 pm
TL;DR: IT asset management software is increasingly being used as a control point for inventory, lifecycle, and compliance, but Zluri’s analysis shows the same asset sprawl that complicates hardware and software tracking also exposes identity relationships, dormant accounts, and shadow AI. That makes asset management a governance problem as much as an operations one.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Zluri: “Top 20 IT Asset Management Software - 2026”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when IT asset management does not include access governance?
A: The inventory may still look complete, but the organisation loses control over who can use each application, token, or device.
Q: Why do stale asset records create identity risk in IT environments?
A: Because access decisions are often made once and forgotten while assets keep changing hands.
Q: How do security teams know if ITAM is actually improving governance?
A: Look for evidence that discovered assets are mapped to owners, active entitlements, and closure actions.
Practitioner guidance
- Map asset records to identity ownership Join CMDB or ITAM records to app owners, service owners, and identity owners so every asset has an accountable access steward.
- Trigger access review on asset state changes Require recertification or entitlement review when assets are reassigned, retired, or moved between teams, rather than waiting for quarterly audits.
- Inventory shadow AI with attached identities Classify unsanctioned AI apps, SaaS tools, and embedded automations together with their tokens, accounts, and approvers.
Bottom line: IT asset management software now matters to identity governance because asset records often expose who still has access after ownership changes.
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
25/06/2026 2:32 am
ITAM is becoming identity infrastructure, not just inventory tooling. Once asset records are linked to entitlements and activity, the control no longer stops at knowing what exists. It becomes a way to detect whether access still matches asset ownership, which is the real governance question for modern environments. Practitioners should treat asset data as part of the identity system, not a separate operations ledger.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should organisations connect ITAM, IAM, and IGA workflows?
A: Yes. Asset management without identity workflows stops at description, while identity governance without asset context misses the operational trigger points where access should change. Joining the two helps teams tie ownership, lifecycle events, and entitlement reviews together so that access follows the real state of the asset, not a stale record.
👉 Read our full editorial: IT asset management software and the identity surface gap
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group