Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 1:09 am
TL;DR: Choosing a user lifecycle management platform is less about automation features and more about avoiding integration, security, support, cost, and adoption mistakes that undermine onboarding, offboarding, and access changes, according to Zluri. The real test is whether the platform improves lifecycle governance without creating new workflow, compliance, or control gaps.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Zluri: Lifecycle Management 7 Mistakes to Avoid while Choosing an User Lifecycle Management Platform (ULM)
By the numbers:
- 70% of organisations grant AI systems more access than they would give a human employee performing the exact same job.
- 91% of former employee tokens remain active after offboarding, leaving organisations vulnerable to potential security breaches.
- 44% of NHI tokens are exposed in the wild, being sent or stored over platforms like Teams, Jira tickets, Confluence pages, and code commits.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations choose a user lifecycle management platform?
A: They should choose based on control coverage, integration depth, and operational reliability rather than surface-level automation claims.
Q: Why do lifecycle platforms fail even when they look feature complete?
A: They fail when connectors, approvals, and reconciliation are weaker than the business process they are supposed to enforce.
Q: What do security teams get wrong about user lifecycle management?
A: They often treat lifecycle tooling as an administrative convenience instead of an identity control.
Practitioner guidance
- Map lifecycle workflows end to end Document the joiner, mover, and leaver paths for every major application class, including who approves, what system is authoritative, and where handoffs can stall.
- Test connector integrity before deployment Verify that the platform reconciles identity data correctly across Active Directory, SSO, HR systems, and high-value SaaS applications.
- Treat offboarding as a control proof point Measure whether revocation, license removal, and account closure actually complete when a user leaves.
What's in the full article
Zluri's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- A longer breakdown of the seven selection mistakes and how they show up during platform evaluation
- Product-specific examples of onboarding, offboarding, and approval workflow design inside the ULM interface
- Vendor guidance on automation, support, and update expectations for implementation teams
- Practical framing around user experience, training, and documentation for rollout planning
👉 Read Zluri's guide to common user lifecycle management platform mistakes →
User lifecycle management platforms: the governance gap teams miss?
Explore further
12/06/2026 10:53 am
Lifecycle platform selection is really an access-control design decision. The article treats ULM as an operational efficiency choice, but the underlying issue is whether the platform can enforce identity state changes with enough reliability to be trusted as a control. If onboarding, mover events, and offboarding are not executed consistently, lifecycle governance becomes advisory rather than preventive. Practitioners should judge these tools by control durability, not workflow polish.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 91% of former employee tokens remain active after offboarding, leaving organisations vulnerable to potential security breaches, according to The 2025 State of NHIs and Secrets in Cybersecurity.
- 62% of all secrets are duplicated and stored in multiple locations, causing unnecessary redundancy and increasing the risk of accidental exposure, according to The 2025 State of NHIs and Secrets in Cybersecurity.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable when lifecycle automation leaves access behind?
A: Accountability sits with the identity and application owners who approved the workflow and the teams that rely on the platform's control outcomes. If revocation or change management fails, the organisation must treat it as a governance failure, not a user error. That is why auditability and ownership mapping matter.
👉 Read our full editorial: User lifecycle management platform selection: 7 mistakes to avoid
