Controlspan / Field notes   Enterprise GRC intelligenceResearch edition · October 2026 · US market
Do-it-yourself game plans / RESEARCH NOTE 17

Which pitfalls should stop or change the programme?

CONTROLSPAN RESEARCH DESKSECTION 02 · PAGE 17 OF 20Last updated 28 October 2026

Use this proposed exception table at each steering meeting.

Warning sign Recommended response
Sponsor wants a platform but cannot name the first outcome Return to the charter before procurement
Every stakeholder request is mandatory Resolve priorities and publish exclusions
Migration is described only as a CSV upload Require evidence, history, relationship and reconciliation scope
Demonstrations use only administrator accounts Repeat with contributor, reviewer, restricted and integration identities
A connector is shown without failure handling Require an interface specification and recovery test
Administration is assumed to be negligible Run the buyer-administrator task test and revise staffing
A mandatory feature is only on a roadmap Treat it as unproven; change the contract, scope or shortlist
The quote lacks licence-action definitions Obtain written clarification before TCO comparison
AI appears to save drafting time but increases review Measure end-to-end effort and keep the feature optional
Exit evidence consists only of a report download Test reconstruction of relationships, attachments and relevant history
← PREVIOUS PAGEStage 12: How do you preserve renewal leverage and a workable exit?NEXT →What should you do in the first 30 days?

Find the evidence.

Search across 188 research pages and 12 sections.