# 1. What finding would make you tell us to repair our current arrangements rather than buy another GRC platform?

**A good answer should include a credible reason not to buy.** The interview should separate a product limitation from an ownership, process-design or configuration problem.

**Why it matters to buyers.** Deloitte’s published Optro implementation material describes an unnamed client using its platform mainly as a repository, with weak initial control design and an overly detailed audit configuration. The described intervention refreshed the existing deployment rather than treating replacement as the only route. This is a supplier-authored example, not evidence of how frequently that situation occurs. ([deloitte.com](https://www.deloitte.com/content/dam/assets-zone3/us/en/docs/services/audit-assurance/2026/aa-optro-placemat-0402.pdf))

**Put it to:** Norman Marks and Michael Rasmussen, followed by the incumbent platform owner.

**A strong answer should cover:**
- The business decision or assurance activity that is failing today.
- Whether the failure comes from missing capability, poor source data, unclear accountability or configuration choices.
- Four options: retain, repair, replace or build a bounded component.
- The evidence needed to reject each option, including the cost of keeping existing workarounds.
- Conditions that would justify delaying procurement until ownership or data readiness improves.

**Ask for proof:** a one-page option appraisal using the same workflow, service expectations and cost horizon for every option.

**Follow-up:** “If the incumbent could demonstrate this workflow next week, what remaining evidence would justify replacement?”

> **Expert quote — pending interview:** [Insert approved quotation, name, affiliation and interview date.]