12 requirements evaluated: 10 supported, 2 partial.
Supported
Requirement evaluated: The platform must support the full internal audit lifecycle beyond SOX, including annual audit planning (risk assessment, audit universe, resource scheduling), fieldwork execution with structured workpapers, and issue tracking through resolution. Workpapers must support version locking and reviewer sign-off to meet documentation standards appropriate for a newly public company establishing its internal audit function.
For a newly public company replacing spreadsheets and email with a formal internal audit function, TeamMate+ covers the entire lifecycle in a single platform. <cite index="14-1,14-2">TeamMate+ is built to move audit teams through the complete audit workflow, from establishing annual plans and planning individual audits, through fieldwork and execution, reporting, closing, and follow-up.</cite> On the planning side, <cite index="10-1">the platform supports risk-based audit planning (identifying and prioritizing high-risk areas, self-assessments to capture stakeholder feedback, developing work plans for each team and audit universe, and reviewing historical coverage to inform planning), as wel …
Limitations: <cite index="8-5">Some reviewers note that certain risk assessment or reporting features have limitations or require manual workarounds,</cite> which is worth validating during a demo for a newly public company that may need highly configurable risk-scoring models. …
Supported
Requirement evaluated: The platform must enforce role-based access controls that segregate permissions between control owners (who can only respond to evidence requests and view their assigned controls), internal auditors (who can execute tests and document workpapers), and audit leadership and external auditor read-only roles (who can review but not modify completed workpapers or locked test results). This is required for a post-IPO SOX 404 environment where external auditors will review the platform's evidence and documentation.
For a post-IPO SOX 404 environment, TeamMate+ enforces role-based access across its three integrated modules (Audit, Controls, and Analytics) through a combination of configurable permission settings, engagement-level user assignments, and workpaper workflow states. Control owners and business users interact through a dedicated auditee-facing access layer: <cite index="9-2,9-3">the control self-assessment process empowers control owners to evaluate effectiveness, attach evidence, and self-identify issues through an interface designed for first-line business owners with intuitive task management and easy navigation of controls.</cite> Internal auditors operate with full edit rights scoped to …
Limitations: Public documentation does not explicitly describe whether the external auditor read-only role and audit leadership read-only role are formally distinct system roles with separately defined permission sets, or whether they share a single 'read-only' role type that an admin assigns to both personas. …
Partial
Requirement evaluated: The platform must offer clearly scoped platform orientation: the buyer needs to evaluate whether a given vendor is primarily SOX-centric (deep RCM and PCAOB-aligned testing workflows), broader internal audit-first (flexible audit lifecycle with SOX as one module), or full GRC (policy, risk, and compliance management beyond audit). The vendor's licensing structure, workflow defaults, and out-of-the-box templates must make this orientation transparent so the buyer can assess fit for a post-IPO company building both SOX compliance and an internal audit function simultaneously.
For a post-IPO company trying to determine whether TeamMate+ is a SOX-first, IA-first, or full-GRC platform before committing to implementation, the product's modular licensing structure provides the clearest orientation signal. <cite index="21-9">TeamMate's solutions for auditors include audit management, controls management, and data analysis</cite> -- and these are distinct, separately licensable products. …
Limitations: A post-IPO buyer building a real PCAOB 404(b) program cannot easily determine from out-of-the-box signals alone whether TeamMate+ Controls delivers PCAOB-specific testing workflow defaults (deficiency classification, management assessment documentation, ITGC scoping) …
Supported
Requirement evaluated: The platform must support structured scheduling, documentation, and sign-off for control walkthroughs and design-effectiveness testing, replacing the buyer's current manual, email-based process. Each test must be linkable to a specific control in the RCM, must support attachment of evidence, and must enforce a reviewer/approver workflow so that no test is considered complete without documented sign-off.
For a newly public company replacing email-and-spreadsheet SOX testing, TeamMate+ structures each control test as a 'procedure' (or 'step') within an audit project, and those procedures are linked to the risk-and-control matrix entries so every test record carries the parent control's metadata. Evidence files are attached directly at the procedure or workpaper level rather than in a shared project folder, keeping a traceable line from each piece of evidence to its specific control test. …
Limitations: The platform does not appear to offer distinct, out-of-the-box template types that formally distinguish 'walkthrough/design-effectiveness' tests from 'operating-effectiveness' tests; the buyer will configure that distinction through custom procedure templates and fields rather than selecting a named test type. …
Showing the 4 most recent of 12. The rest are in the comparisons listed below.