From tools to trust: Why compliance still relies on human expertise
The regulatory landscape is continually evolving and compliance demands are growing more intense. As standards evolve and audits become more detailed, organisations often need to comply with multiple frameworks, standards and regulations simultaneously. This results in compliance teams facing mounting pressure. ISMS.online's State of Information Security report found that nearly 60% of respondents are struggling to keep up with the pace of regulatory change which is making it difficult to comply with information security best practices.
Similarly, tasks such as conducting risk assessments, maintaining internal audit programmes and updating policies are becoming increasingly difficult to manage manually. As a result, automation can no longer be seen as optional – it is now an essential component for managing modern compliance demands.
Automating routine compliance activities can help streamline processes, reduce human error and improve overall transparency. In fact, the 2023 Risk & Compliance report from Thomson Reuters revealed that 65% of professionals believe automation can also cut both costs and complexity.
Despite these benefits, automation is often misunderstood. It's not about replacing human expertise but enhancing it.
Compliance: The increasing demands
With limited time and budget, compliance teams are facing greater expectations and, as a result, manual tools like spreadsheets and email threads are proving unsustainable. Automation provides a clear path forward, reducing duplication of effort, ensuring consistency, and freeing up valuable time that teams can reinvest into more strategic work. Not to mention the reduction in mental load and staff burnout.
For example, one of our customers, healthcare rm, a leading integrated healthcare provider, was relying on manual compliance processes, using spreadsheets, document storage systems, and manual email reminders. While these methods had been sufficient in the past, this was becoming increasingly inefficient, making it difficult to maintain real-time oversight and prepare for audits efficiently. Similarly, for another customer, G Games, a leading iGaming software house, version control posed a challenge - prior to implementing ISMS.online's software. The team had difficulty finding the latest versions of policies, while compliance activities and processes took place in disparate areas.
Automated workflows can help manage evidence collection, monitor controls and trigger notifications to ensure that nothing is forgotten or delayed, without constant manual oversight. Real-time dashboards also provided visibility across the organisation and support faster decision-making. These capabilities allow organisations to meet compliance requirements more efficiently and with fewer errors. Yet, automation can only go so far. Without human oversight, there's a risk of overconfidence in automated systems, which can lead to blind spots and ethical missteps. Similarly, algorithms can't interpret context, nuance or evolving risk in the way people can.
When human insight matters most
Whilst automation can tell you that a control is overdue, it cannot decide whether that control is still relevant, whether the associated risk has changed, or how it impacts your wider business objectives. No system, no matter how advanced, can fully replace human insight and experience.
Take ISO 27001 as an example. Automation can support task management, policy reviews, and document tracking, but essential tasks like risk assessment and crafting treatment plans still require human insight. Our information security experts estimate that only around 20% of ISO 27001 can be fully automated. These are not theoretical limitations. In practice, failing to apply human oversight to automated processes can introduce real vulnerabilities. A false sense of security, blind reliance on software outputs, and the erosion of accountability are all risks when people are taken completely out of the loop.
Rather than viewing automation and human oversight as competing forces, organisations should see them as complementary. The most resilient compliance programmes are those where people, process, and technology are in sync.
Who's accountable?
The key is to ensure that automation is implemented with responsibility and transparency. Every automated task should have a clear owner, and every decision point should have a route for escalation if needed.
Leaders also need to be aware of what's happening and why, and who is responsible. This clarity not only ensures accurate compliance but also builds trust among stakeholders, regulators and customers.
For example, a scattergun approach using disconnected point solutions can create data silos, increase confusion and ultimately add risk. The most successful organisations take a strategic view, choosing platforms that bring all their compliance activities into a single, transparent environment.
Businesses must build tools that support human excellence. The aim is not to replace people, but to remove barriers that prevent them from being productive. Automation is part of that, but it must always be framed within the context of responsibility and governance.
Compliance as a growth enabler
Rather than being a burden, compliance should be a source of strength. It should support strategic goals, and foster trust with customers and regulators. Automation plays a key role in achieving this by eliminating friction and streamlining operations. But people also need to ensure that compliance efforts stay aligned with business values and remain ethically sound.
Organisations looking to adapt their compliance processes should begin by reviewing workflows. They need to identify which tasks are repeatable and rules-based, and therefore are candidates for automation, and which require human insight. From there, businesses can then identify the opportunities to automate and adopt tools that combine transparency and scalability. Businesses should invest in platforms that provide visibility across the compliance lifecycle and ensure that oversight is embedded at key decision points. Crucially, governance frameworks should define responsibilities clearly and promote active accountability.
Investing in a single, cohesive platform provides better long-term value than piecemeal tools. It ensures visibility across the compliance lifecycle and supports governance at critical decision points. With clearly defined responsibilities and accountability structures, businesses can build resilient and responsive compliance systems.
Ensuring balanced compliance
As organisations increasingly work toward certifications like ISO 27001, SOC 2 and GDPR compliance, the pressure to simplify and unify their compliance processes continues to rise. However, decisions can't be reduced to black-and-white answers. Effective compliance must reflect the realities of today's evolving threat landscape and meet the expectations of regulators, partners and customers alike.
Automation plays a critical role in enabling efficiency in today's regulatory landscape - but it's not the whole story. People are still central to driving the strategy, interpreting the data and ensuring that decisions align with both risk and responsibility. For automation to work effectively, compliance leaders must first understand their challenges, apply automation with precision and reinforce governance across the organisation.
While automation brings speed, consistency, and scalability, these traits alone won't deliver meaningful outcomes unless guided by human insight. It's the people, who bring judgment, ethical perspective and strategic thinking, that keep compliance anchored in purpose and prevent it from becoming a tick box exercise.
By cultivating a culture of ownership, transparency and shared accountability, companies can transform compliance from a routine obligation into a source of competitive strength. When human intelligence and automation are thoughtfully integrated, compliance evolves, becoming more agile, more resilient and ultimately a driver of sustainable business growth.
