What do you like best about TeamMate+?
TeamMate+ is a powerful audit and risk management platform that offers a lot of value—especially once users get past its steep learning curve. While the initial setup and navigation can be challenging, the underlying logic becomes clear with use. The flow between audit-level objects—risks, controls, procedures, workpapers, and findings—is well-structured and supports a coherent audit trail.
The user interface is intuitive and clean, making it easier to work efficiently once familiar with the system. Coverage capabilities, including the use of secondary dimensions, add flexibility and depth, though they can be tricky to master. Dashboard functionality is another highlight—users can build personalized views, and administrators can now publish dashboards for broader use, which enhances usability.
Reporting via APIs is particularly strong, allowing teams to connect external tools and derive insights tailored to their needs. The platform includes a wide range of fields and aligns well with industry logic, making it a solid choice for risk assessment and audit execution.
Time tracking is simple and effective, and while resourcing features could be expanded, the core model is sound. The ability to engage directly with stakeholders within the platform is a great feature that supports agile auditing, though it does require some change management.
That said, TeamMate+ is less configurable than some might hope, especially for more complex environments. It’s an excellent fit for smaller teams, but the price point can be a barrier. Still, it’s a comprehensive solution—from risk assessment and coverage planning to audit execution and evidence management.
Overall, TeamMate+ has a strong foundation and many well-designed features. With continued focus on user feedback and practical enhancements, it has the potential to become an even more effective and user-centered tool. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
What do you dislike about TeamMate+?
I am extremely frustrated that MS365 integration is still not available. Considering that MS Online integration technology has existed for quite some time, it seems unreasonable that this basic feature is missing. I find it hard to believe the system still lacks such fundamental functionality. Although I am aware that integration is reportedly in development, the current situation remains unacceptable.
As an administrator, I also find the configuration options limiting. Essential controls that should be available simply are not. For example, there is no way to disable close rules for users, which makes it far too easy to become non-compliant with standards, since users can delete all review notes and history themselves. This approach appears to be driven by cost-saving motives related to storage, which I strongly disagree with. Given that the software is supposed to be risk-focused, it should prioritize data retention to comply with regulations across different jurisdictions.
The report generation features are also disappointing, and in my opinion, they are even less effective than what was offered in TeamMate AM. The Business Rules engine, now offered as an add-on, really should be included in the premium license package.
I could list many more issues. As an administrator for a large organization who is very familiar with this software, I can say that, as a subject matter expert on TM+, there is still much to be desired. Bug fixes are not prioritized based on importance; for instance, there was a bug affecting multiple versions related to entity coverage, where objects from assessments were not properly carried over to audits. When rolling forward, the entity immediately becomes disassociated from the audit, as still seen and evident in the July release.
It feels as though TeamMate+ has increasingly emphasized commercial strategy, which may be contributing to a growing disconnect between the design team and end users. That said, I remain genuinely hopeful that future development will reflect a renewed focus on user feedback and practical needs.
My comments come from a place of recognizing the platform’s potential—there’s a strong foundation here, but meaningful progress will depend on valuing user input as a key driver of innovation and long-term success. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
