← All work

Identity governance & access

Who gets access, when it changes, and when it is taken away, mapped so it is provable

For IT Business Analysis / Identity Governance roles

Identity governance across a portfolio of SOX-scoped applications. Access is granted, changed, and removed through a mix of manual and automated paths, and an auditor wants to see that it is controlled end to end. Here is how I model it so the answer is on paper.

Access is only as good as the record behind it

Every grant tied to an approved request. Every change re-checked for segregation of duties. Every departure closed the same day and swept a week later. And a recurring review that actually removes what is not needed, instead of rubber-stamping it.

  • 3 eventsjoiner · mover · leaver
  • 1 HR triggerthe system of record for every change
  • Recurring reviewwith teeth: revoke means revoke

The approach

Current state, future state, requirements and control points, then the recurring access review.

  1. 01 Current stateHow access actually flows today: the manual paths, the automated ones, reconciliation, and the exceptions.
  2. 02 Future stateThe target joiner–mover–leaver flow: provisioning, role transfers, terminations, certifications.
  3. 03 Requirements & control pointsTurned into requirements, roles, handoffs, control points, and documented risk.
  4. 04 Access reviewsThe recurring certification: who reviews, what they see, and what a "revoke" actually triggers.

The future-state flow

Pick a lifecycle event to see the trigger, what happens, the control point, and how the loop gets closed.

Trigger
New hire record in the HR system, with a start date and a role
Birthright access
Provisioned automatically from the role: email, directory, core apps
Role-based access
Manager requests from a catalog; approval routed by sensitivity; SoD check before grant
Control point
No access without an approved request tied to an active HR record
Close the loop
First access certification at 30 days confirms only what was intended is live

The access review, in practice

A certification is only worth running if it changes something. Four entitlements a reviewer would actually see, and the call on each.

Entitlement
Administrator on a business-reporting platform
Signal
Last used 90+ days ago; the role only needs read access
Risk
Standing elevated access with no active need
Decision
Revoke admin, grant read; note for the app owner
Outcome
Revoke

The result

A model where every access change has a trigger, an approval, a control point, and a record, plus a review that removes what is stale instead of confirming it. The kind of thing an auditor signs off in one pass.

  • Process modeling
  • Identity & access governance
  • SoD & control points
  • User access reviews
  • SOX

A generic identity-governance scenario. The lifecycle flows, the control points, and the access-review decisions are how I actually model this work.

Available now Looking for my next role.

Open to a senior full-time role. Hiring brief →