Introduction
Ask five people what Privileged Access Management (PAM) means and you’re likely to hear five different answers. For some, it’s a password vault; for others, a suite of tools that includes session proxies, least‑privilege and secrets management. As a result, procurement processes can become muddled, with feature lists that resemble vendor catalogues more than actual requirements.
This article clarifies what PAM should achieve and offers guidance on how to define requirements and select vendors based on outcomes rather than checklists.
What Is PAM?
At its core, PAM is about controlling who or what can access critical infrastructure, applications and workloads, for how long and with what level of privilege. The goal is to minimise risk by ensuring that elevated permissions are granted only when needed and monitored appropriately.
The Typical Procurement Journey
Many organisations follow a predictable path:
- Hire or consult experts to define requirements.
- Draft requirements—often using analyst or vendor templates.
- Consult analysts and read market reports.
- Research vendors and request demonstrations.
- Issue RFI/RFP documents listing desired features.
- Evaluate responses and shortlist vendors.
- Conduct proofs of concept or proofs of value.
- Negotiate and purchase.
- Deploy, hoping it will meet needs.
While structured, this process can go wrong if the requirements are poorly defined or biased toward a particular vendor’s capabilities.
The Pitfalls of Copy‑Paste Requirements
Many organisations start with templates from analysts or vendors. These documents often emphasise specific features like “session recording” or “agent‑based privilege elevation,” which align with certain products. This approach introduces bias and may steer you toward solutions that aren’t the best fit.
Instead of listing features, focus on outcomes: secure, low‑friction access; real‑time credential generation; seamless integration with existing tools; and comprehensive audit trails. An example outcome‑based requirement might be:
> “The solution must connect users to resources securely with minimal friction and generate short‑lived credentials on demand.”
Compare that with: “The solution must offer a password vault and session recording.” The latter presupposes a specific solution; the former describes the result you want.
Understanding the Role of Analysts and Vendors
Analyst reports can be valuable, but they’re not neutral. To qualify for certain “Magic Quadrants” or “Wave” reports, vendors must meet extensive criteria—often requiring a broad feature set and specific revenue thresholds. Smaller, innovative vendors rarely qualify, even if they solve your problem better.
Vendors, for their part, emphasise the capabilities they have. They are unlikely to say, “We’re not the right fit,” especially if you have budget. Recognise that both analysts and vendors have incentives that may not align perfectly with your needs.
Crafting Outcome‑Based Requirements
Define what success looks like before exploring solutions. Consider questions like:
• What resources must be protected, and who needs access? • How should privileges be granted and revoked? Permanently? Just in time? • How will user experience affect adoption? • What integration points with existing IAM, SSO or CI/CD pipelines are required? • How will you demonstrate compliance and auditability?
Document requirements in plain language focused on results. Invite feedback from stakeholders across security, operations and development.
Best Practices for Vendor Selection
• Explore niche providers: Don’t limit yourself to market leaders. Smaller vendors may excel in your specific use case. • Engage users early: Let administrators and developers test solutions to gauge usability. • Ask for outcome‑driven demonstrations: Instead of a generic product demo, request scenarios that mirror your requirements. • Consider scalability and flexibility: Your needs will evolve; choose solutions that can adapt. • Insist on clarity: Seek transparency about licensing, deployment models and future product roadmaps.
Conclusion
Privileged Access Management is not a static set of features but a strategy to control and monitor elevated access. By defining clear, outcome‑based requirements and looking beyond vendor checklists, you can select a solution that truly addresses your risks and supports your business. A thoughtful approach not only demystifies PAM but also encourages innovation and better security outcomes.
