Are You Ready for an IT Review?

The IT review landscapes of many large and medium-sized businesses – especially Fortune 1000 companies – have undergone a dramatic shift due to the exponential evolution of business software, the surge of AI models, and the accompanying rise in cybersecurity risks.

For security integrators, these changes can add 4-15 months of avoidable delays when contractors and vendors are unprepared for the heightened scrutiny in the new formal IT approval processes. Do not assume upgrades to existing systems will bypass review; IT’s mandate is to ensure all networked infrastructure meets security, compliance, and regulatory requirements.

To serve enterprise security customers, understanding today’s broader IT review environment is critical. In competitive bids, being ready for comprehensive IT scrutiny can be the deciding factor, and it sometimes results in favoring a less-qualified competitor who navigates the process faster and more effectively.

Most security integrators are familiar with many of these IT review board evaluation areas, having responded to RFPs from large enterprises, government agencies, or educational institutions; however, the scope and rigor of today’s IT review boards often exceed traditional procurement, especially when AI, cybersecurity, data handling, or cross-departmental integration are involved.

Every customer’s IT environment is different, and no two review processes are alike. Delays from missteps can mean postponed revenue, lost bids, and reputational damage – sometimes enough to sink a business before lessons are learned.

In the new era of enterprise security projects, integrators must use preparation for IT reviews as a competitive edge, and integrator executives can start at the upcoming GSX show by taking advantage of being in front of the vendors in attendance to ask pointed questions, as well as explaining the steps that need to be taken with current and prospective customers.

The Enterprise IT Breaking Point

Even before the rise of AI, enterprise IT functions were operating at full capacity, managing rapid cloud expansion, SaaS proliferation, cybersecurity demands, and a growing need for system integration. The AI boom has intensified these challenges, pushing many IT teams to the brink.

In turn, security integrators are starting to experience business-hampering side effects of global AI adoption. AI proliferation has driven the rollout of new and upgraded software systems – almost all involving AI – that transform business workflows through intelligent automation; however, many of these systems have increased cyber risks due to vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, or unintended behaviors in AI components. The high-performance computing power behind AI systems makes them valuable targets for attackers seeking to exploit or steal these resources, and in many enterprise organizations, expanding IT, OT, and IoT software footprints are increasing both the breadth and complexity of cyber-attack surfaces.

Enterprise IT’s response to this growing complexity is now having significant downstream effects on physical security projects. Unexpected IT and procurement reviews are delaying project approvals by as many as 15 months, depending on the size and complexity of projects, and how well-prepared the integrator and solution vendors are. Gaps in vendor documentation, whether business or product-related, can add even more delays – 60 days or more for every misstep.

The burden falls most heavily on the security integrator – especially on business development teams trying to sustain client momentum during prolonged approval cycles. As project scale grows, IT scrutiny expands to include not just product performance, but proof of long-term delivery capability and business stability. Even harmless but irrelevant answers can weaken credibility.

Integrators must be prepared by securing the required vendor materials in advance and aligning with customer expectations. For solutions requiring a proof-of-concept (PoC) or pilot project, the approval objectives, timelines, acceptance criteria, and the roles of IT, the vendor, and the integrator must be defined from the outset.

The Role of IT Review Boards

IT review boards now apply deeper, broader scrutiny to proposed solutions – both on-premises and cloud-based. Their focus has expanded beyond technical specifications and cybersecurity to include delivery credibility, vendor maturity, and long-term service reliability. This shift reflects the higher stakes for performance, security, and compliance in enterprise environments.

Physical security projects are often evaluated with the same processes used for business-critical IT initiatives, even though their requirements and risk profiles differ. Intake forms, scoring systems, and review templates are frequently designed for IT software procurement, not integrated security systems; however, they are still applied to them. This misalignment can create delays and confusion. Integrators may be asked to supply information irrelevant to their project while also needing to provide critical details that the form never requests.

Without proactive clarification and supporting evidence, projects can stall for weeks or months as review boards request and process additional information.

Two Distinct Areas of IT Review

As project sizes and technology complexity grow, IT involvement has expanded beyond reviewing technical specs or cybersecurity risks. In practice, there are two parallel tracks of review – each with its own purpose, timeline, and criteria. While both tracks fall under the umbrella of “IT review,” one focuses on the business partner, the other on the technology footprint. Preparing for only one can result in costly delays and credibility setbacks.

Onboarding and business qualification: This first track is required for contractors, integrators, and SaaS solution providers. This is not a product review but a business review that assesses whether a proposed provider can be relied on as a long-term partner. For security integrators, this may involve financial vetting, insurance verification, service history, and large-scale deployment references. It often includes a review of the company’s internal IT security posture, focusing on organizational maturity, delivery credibility, and alignment with the customer’s enterprise IT security profile.

Technical solution evaluation: This second track digs deeply into the proposed on-site or cloud-based solution. For SaaS providers, it begins with evidence of platform security, such as SOC 2 compliance, third-party penetration test results, and documentation and secure software development practices. On-premises infrastructure, which includes software and hardware connecting to the enterprise network, undergoes similar scrutiny.

IT teams examine product lifecycle, firmware update practices, vulnerability management, and warranty terms (e.g., advance replacement vs. return-then-replace). They also assess the provider’s capacity for long-term maintenance and support, including diagnostics, service response times, patching schedules, and continuity over multi-year lifecycles.

The Many Types of Review Boards

Not all organizations have every board listed here; however, most large enterprises and regulated institutions will have some combination of them. Integrators should check with enterprise customers to see if their IT function has, or plans to establish, a formal IT review board process. If yes, find out if security system expansions will be subject to it.

As they prepare to go before these IT review boards, integrators should note that these panels are often overloaded and may be booked months in advance. A two-month wait is common, and incomplete or incorrect submissions requiring resubmission can easily turn a two-month cycle into four months or more. Additionally, a good step in preparation would be to ask fellow integrators if they have undergone a formal IT review board process to reveal lessons learned.

Here are eight of the most common IT review boards that integrators should anticipate in enterprise organizations:

Architecture Review Board (ARB): Ensures proposed systems align with enterprise IT architecture principles and long-term strategy. Projects adding network components, especially those integrating with enterprise systems (e.g., identity, building automation, parking management), often require ARB review. It reviews architecture diagrams, integration points, scalability, redundancy, and standards alignment.

Key considerations for integrators: The ARB looks for adherence to architecture standards, avoidance of redundancy, and fit with the long-term roadmap. Be ready to show scalability and support for standardization goals across departments or regions.

Security Review Board (SRB): Evaluates a solution’s cybersecurity posture to ensure compliance with internal and external requirements; thus, all physical security systems – especially those with network, cloud, or AI components – are of high interest for SRBs. Specifically, it reviews threat models, attack surfaces, authentication, encryption, system hardening, and vulnerability management.

Key considerations for integrators: SRBs will demand that integrators provide documentation on encryption protocols, identity and access controls, vulnerability disclosure practices, and third-party penetration test results. Expect systems storing or transmitting sensitive data (video, identity metadata) to face heightened scrutiny.

Network Review Board (NRB): Protects network performance, reliability, and security by evaluating bandwidth, segmentation, VLAN design, IP allocation, and firewall rules. IP cameras, cloud gateways, video storage servers, and remote management interfaces typically require NRB review.

Key considerations for integrators: The NRB will require network diagrams, bandwidth estimates, and segmentation plans aligned with zero-trust or least-privilege models. Any inbound connections, open ports, or unmanaged devices must be justified and tightly controlled.

Cloud Review Board (CRB): Assesses cloud-hosted applications and services for compliance with cloud governance and security policies by reviewing service architecture, provider selection, data residency, multi-tenancy risks, and alignment with the organization’s cloud strategy. Cloud video storage, remote access, or SaaS-based AI analytics frequently trigger a CRB review.

Key considerations for integrators: Expect requests for certifications (e.g., SOC 2, ISO 27001, FedRAMP), secure API integration, audit logging, and cloud-to-on-premises connectivity documentation. CRBs closely monitor risks related to shadow IT and require transparency about whether video/data are processed in shared, multi-tenant environments or dedicated, isolated cloud infrastructures.

Data Governance Review Board (DGRB): Ensures compliance with data classification, handling, privacy, and retention rules. It reviews data types collected (e.g., video, identity metadata), storage locations, access controls, and data-sharing agreements. Systems that capture or process PII – such as facial recognition, license plate data, and investigation case management platforms – often require DGRB review.

Key considerations for integrators: Expect questions on data access, retention, and sharing. Privacy impact assessments (PIAs) may be required. Be ready to show compliance with policies and laws (e.g., GDPR, CCPA), especially for AI that features people-tracking or identity management.

AI Review Board (AIRB): Oversees ethical, compliant, and risk-aware AI deployment by reviewing AI model transparency, bias mitigation, explainability, data training sources, and decision-making accountability; thus, AI-driven video analytics, behavior detection, facial recognition, and automated alerts are common focuses for AIRBs.

Key considerations for integrators: Provide explanations of decision-making, training datasets, retraining frequency, and accuracy metrics. Regulated industries often require explainability and human oversight. Note that large enterprises may have AI expertise exceeding that of most integrators.

Enterprise Risk Management Committee (ERMC): Oversees operational, cybersecurity, regulatory, and reputational risks introduced by new systems. It evaluates risk exposure, residual risk after mitigation, and exceptions from other boards. Expect large-scale or high-impact projects – or those posing systemic risks – to be escalated to the ERMC.

Key considerations for integrators: While not specifically an IT review board, this committee checks risk ownership, mitigation measures, and exception justifications – for example, a global SOC integrating with site security, HR, and building automation may be referred here for final approval or risk acceptance.

Change Advisory Board (CAB): Authorizes changes to IT production environments to ensure availability, minimize disruption, and maintain compliance by reviewing deployment and rollback plans, testing procedures, change windows, and post-change validation; thus, projects requiring changes to IT infrastructure, DNS entries, firewall rules, or VPN configurations may require CAB approval.

Key considerations for integrators: The CAB may require integrators to coordinate changes with IT schedules, perform testing in staging, and document rollback steps. Weak operational planning by integration teams can cause delays or cancellations.

Solutions to Help Integrators Navigate the Process

Having experienced today’s complex IT review landscape firsthand, Vendict (https://vendict.com) founders Udi Cohen (CEO) and Michael Keslassy (CTO) have created an AI-native governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) platform built to deliver transparent, evidence-backed compliance answers.

The solution automates IT security reviews, with each response traceable to real documentation. This streamlines workflows, eliminates guesswork, and ensures accuracy and auditability, so contractors and vendors can navigate the evolving IT review landscape with greater speed, clarity, and certainty.

Additionally, integrators should leverage GSX 2025 to open a dialogue with companies like Alcatraz (booth 2824),  Ambient AI (booth 3119), and Viakoo (partner booth 1145), which have been through the full gamut of IT reviews and are well-prepared to support those processes.

To prepare for GSX and other vendor interactions, for cloud-based platforms, ask what documentation and support a vendor can provide to an IT Cloud Review Board, and how many times they have participated in that process. For vendors with AI-based or AI-enabled offerings, ask what documentation and support they can provide to an AI Review Board, and how often they have been asked to participate in one.