Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 10:22 pm
TL;DR: Quantum Brilliance cut SaaS costs by 30 to 50 percent and improved offboarding, visibility, and compliance support after replacing spreadsheet-based administration with unified SaaS discovery, license management, access reviews, and automated notifications, according to Josys. The case shows that unmanaged application sprawl is both a financial control problem and an identity governance problem.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Josys: How Quantum Brilliance Reduced SaaS Costs and Strengthened IT Visibility and Security with Josys
By the numbers:
- 30 to 50 percent SaaS cost reduction came from license optimization and eliminating unused subscriptions.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations govern SaaS access when app ownership is decentralised?
A: Use a single inventory of applications, owners, and admin contacts, then tie onboarding, offboarding, and access reviews to that inventory.
Q: Why do manual offboarding processes create security risk in SaaS environments?
A: Manual offboarding leaves too much room for delay, inconsistency, and human error across separate admin consoles.
Q: How do access reviews improve SaaS governance when systems are fragmented?
A: They improve governance only if the organisation can aggregate entitlement data from every app into one reviewable record.
Practitioner guidance
- Implement a live SaaS inventory Create a continuously updated list of all approved and discovered applications, with ownership, admin access, and business purpose recorded for each service.
- Automate leaver revocation across every app Connect offboarding workflows to each SaaS admin surface so account removal is triggered automatically when employment or contractor status changes.
- Centralise access review evidence Pull entitlement data, usage data, and ownership context into one review process so certification decisions are based on current facts rather than spreadsheets.
What's in the full article
Josys' full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- The specific workflow changes used to move from spreadsheets to centralised SaaS administration.
- The practical shape of the automated offboarding notifications and how they fit into day-to-day operations.
- The way access reviews and compliance reports were organised for ISO 27001 support.
- The full list of visibility and provisioning capabilities Josys says it is building next.
👉 Read Josys' case study on SaaS visibility, offboarding, and cost reduction →
SaaS visibility and offboarding gaps are creating identity risk?
Explore further
13/06/2026 1:05 am
Shadow IT is an identity governance problem before it is a spend problem. Once SaaS purchasing becomes decentralised, the organisation no longer has a reliable map of who created access, who owns it, or when it should end. That is exactly where governance breaks down because access control, asset visibility, and procurement drift apart. Practitioners should treat unmanaged app sprawl as a lifecycle control failure, not a software catalogue issue.
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.
- Two-thirds of enterprises have endured a successful cyberattack resulting from compromised non-human identities, with a quarter encountering multiple attacks.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own SaaS visibility and offboarding controls in an identity programme?
A: Ownership should be shared across IT, security, procurement, and application administrators, with clear accountability for each stage of the lifecycle. Identity teams need the authority to define policy, but they also need operational inputs from the teams that buy, administer, and retire the applications.
👉 Read our full editorial: SaaS visibility gaps turn identity governance into a cost and risk issue
