Which supplementary recordings fill the enterprise buying gaps?

These five resources are publisher-hosted webinars or videos. Their inclusion broadens the decision coverage; it does not imply that they are independently reviewed product tests.

7. What belongs in a GRC RFP and implementation specification?

Navigating the Pitfalls and Challenges of a GRC Software RFP and Implementation — OCEG recording

• Who: Michael Rasmussen of GRC 20/20 Research and Cameron Jackson of Riskonnect.
• Date and access: Undated encore page. A recording link is provided; playback entitlement was not confirmed.
• Evidence: Published agenda. Explicitly sponsored by Riskonnect.

What the published agenda supports: The session addresses GRC strategy, solution capabilities, RFP requirements and selection and implementation pitfalls. Its framing separates organisational GRC practice from the technology bought to support it. Those are directly relevant questions for a cross-functional procurement workshop. Recording description and sponsorship disclosure. (oceg.org)

Our suggested buyer exercise: Give every mandatory requirement five fields: business purpose, accountable owner, representative scenario, evidence requested and acceptance criterion.

Boundary: The public description does not establish the detailed advice delivered in the recording. Its sponsorship and unknown original date make it unsuitable as evidence of current competitive positioning.

8. How can a customer implementation inform your business case?

How to Make the Move in Your GRC Program — Onspring recording

• Who: Jennifer Plowman, identified as TransUnion’s Director of Risk & Compliance Systems & Reporting.
• Date: Recording page first published 3 February 2025 and updated 19 March 2026; the update is not a new event date.
• Evidence: Recording description and publisher recap. Vendor-hosted customer account.

Key takeaways: The material covers product evaluation, translating requirements into solutions, mapping required metrics and gaining internal support. The companion recap emphasises stakeholder participation and choosing measures aligned with organisational objectives, including the distinction between leading and lagging indicators. Recording page and recap. (onspring.com)

Our suggested buyer exercise: Define the management report you need first, then work backwards to the records, owners and update routines required to produce it.

Boundary: The accessible material does not establish a transferable implementation budget or staffing model. Recording playback was not tested.

9. What can a ServiceNow IRM release demonstration help you evaluate?

ServiceNow Exchange: What’s New in the Australia release for IRM and Smart Assessment Engine — recording page

• Who: ServiceNow’s risk product team; individual presenters were not named in the reviewed description.
• Date: 18 June 2026; scheduled as a one-hour event.
• Evidence: Official on-demand description and recording route. Vendor product presentation.

What the description supports: The session includes demonstrations of GRC Common Core tools, Smart Assessment Engine and issue-management enhancements. Use it to familiarise evaluators with the workflows the supplier presents—not to establish that those workflows are configured, licensed or appropriate for your organisation. Official event page. (servicenow.com)

Our suggested buyer exercise: Repeat an assessment using your own synthetic records, then introduce an overdue response, rejected evidence and an issue requiring reassignment.

Boundary: This is a June 2026 release-specific recording, not a claim about the newest release. Playback, current packaging and buyer-specific configuration were not validated.

10. How can buyers demand better evidence from agentic AI features?

NIST Information Technology Laboratory AI Webinar Series: Building Measurement Probes into Agentic AI Ecosystems — watch

• Who: NIST Information Technology Laboratory’s AI programme.
• Date: Event dated 7 April 2026; recording runtime not verified.
• Evidence: Official video and event descriptions. Government research briefing.

Key takeaways: NIST describes early research into measurement probes, knowledge-grounded verification and evaluation of agentic outputs. The material focuses on traceability and gaps in measurement infrastructure. It is valuable as a counterweight to polished AI demonstrations, but it is research—not a certification of a commercial GRC feature. Video description and event details. (nist.gov)

Our suggested buyer exercise: Require an inspectable record of source material, tool calls, output, reviewer action and final workflow changes. Separately test restricted evidence, unsupported conclusions and rollback.

Boundary: Those procurement tests are our recommendation, not a NIST-prescribed GRC checklist. This session does not compare platforms.

11. What should US banking buyers understand before accepting framework mappings?

Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT) Transition — Cyber Risk Institute (CRI): FFIEC recording

• Who: FFIEC Industry Outreach, focusing on the Cyber Risk Institute Profile; individual speakers were not identified on the reviewed page.
• Date and access: 13 August 2025; the webinar route requests attendee details.
• Evidence: Official archived-event description.

Key takeaways: This historical session introduces CRI Profile Version 2.1 in the context of the CAT’s 31 August 2025 sunset. Its value for platform selection is framework-transition context—not endorsement of a software product or a determination of your institution’s obligations. FFIEC states that outreach views are informational and not binding on its members. Official event description. (industryoutreach.ffiec.gov)

Our suggested buyer exercise: Ask the supplier to identify the exact framework version in its library and demonstrate how changed mappings preserve previous assessment decisions and evidence.

Boundary: Do not assume the version discussed in this recording remains the appropriate version for a 2026 procurement. Confirm applicability and updates with the institution’s specialists.