The pros and cons of conventional compliance management are articulated through various channels:
- Administrative Burden: Monitoring compliance obligations across dispersed regulations, roles, and geographies poses a considerable administrative burden.
 - Limited Visibility: Organizations do not have end-to-end visibility of compliance status, causing blind spots and inherent risk.
 - Reactive Approach: Traditional systems typically identify compliance issues only when it already become an issue rather than avoiding it in the first place.
 - Completion vs. Comprehension: Compliance monitoring in most instances focuses on the completion of courses rather than actual learning and application of compliance knowledge.
 - Difficulty in Proving Due Diligence: After things go wrong, organizations struggle to demonstrate reasonable attempts at compliance.
 
The pros and cons of conventional compliance management are articulated through various channels:
- Administrative Burden: Monitoring compliance obligations across dispersed regulations, roles, and geographies poses a considerable administrative burden.
 - Limited Visibility: Organizations do not have end-to-end visibility of compliance status, causing blind spots and inherent risk.
 - Reactive Approach: Traditional systems typically identify compliance issues only when it already become an issue rather than avoiding it in the first place.
 - Completion vs. Comprehension: Compliance monitoring in most instances focuses on the completion of courses rather than actual learning and application of compliance knowledge.
 - Difficulty in Proving Due Diligence: After things go wrong, organizations struggle to demonstrate reasonable attempts at compliance.