Legal, risk & compliance · For Chief Risk Officer
Audit-ready compliance evidence, collected automatically
- Claude
- SharePoint
- Jira
- Okta
The short answer
Claude gathers evidence from the systems you already use, such as SharePoint documents, Jira tickets and Okta access records. It matches each piece of evidence to the relevant control, checks it is complete and current, and flags gaps months before the auditor arrives. Named people review and sign off every item.
Key takeaways
- Evidence is gathered continuously, not in a scramble before each audit.
- Every control is mapped to its proof, so gaps show up early.
- Claude only reads what each user is already permitted to see.
- Named owners approve all evidence, keeping accountability with people.
Executive summary
Preparing for an audit or certification often consumes weeks of effort from many teams. Evidence sits in folders, ticket queues and access logs, and someone must hunt it down, check it and match it to each control. Gaps are usually discovered late, when fixing them is expensive and stressful. Claude changes this rhythm. It collects evidence from SharePoint, Jira and Okta as work happens, maps each item to the control it supports, and flags anything missing or out of date. Your compliance team reviews a live dashboard instead of chasing documents. Named control owners approve what matters, and every decision is recorded. The result is a calmer audit calendar, fewer surprises and a clearer picture of your risk position at any point in the year.
What is the real business problem, and what does it cost?
Most organisations treat audit preparation as a periodic event. Controls are designed once, evidence is produced sporadically, and the proof is assembled in a rush before the auditor or certification body arrives. Teams lose days retrieving screenshots, approval emails and access reviews, and the people who hold the knowledge are often the busiest in the business.
The hidden cost is not only the hours. Late discovery of a missing control, an unreviewed access grant or an expired policy attestation can extend audit scope, trigger findings and damage confidence with boards, customers and regulators. Remediation under time pressure is rarely cheap.
- Senior staff pulled away from risk work to chase documents.
- Findings raised in the final weeks, when fixes are hardest to land.
- Inconsistent evidence quality across departments and audit cycles.
What changes when evidence is collected continuously?
With Claude working across your systems, evidence becomes a by-product of normal operations. Approved policy documents in SharePoint, closed change tickets in Jira and access reviews recorded against Okta accounts are gathered on a regular schedule. Each item is labelled with the control it supports and the date it was produced.
Your compliance team shifts from hunting to reviewing. They see which controls are well evidenced, which are thin and which have no proof at all. Gaps appear while there is still time to close them through the normal change process, not in an emergency.
- A standing view of control coverage, refreshed on a schedule you choose.
- Early warnings for expired reviews, overdue attestations and unclosed tickets.
- A consistent evidence format regardless of which team produced the proof.
How does Claude connect to SharePoint, Jira and Okta?
Claude connects to Microsoft 365 through Microsoft's secure connection layer, called Microsoft Graph, so it can read the SharePoint libraries where policies, procedures and signed approvals live. Jira and Okta are connected through Claude connectors, which are secure links between Claude and business tools. Each connection uses the access rights your organisation already sets, so Claude sees only what the relevant user is allowed to see.
For a wider view of how Claude works alongside Microsoft 365 across the organisation, see how Claude and Microsoft 365 together lift productivity across the whole organisation. The same secure principles apply to compliance evidence. A closely related automation is A first week every new joiner remembers for the right reasons.
- SharePoint: policies, procedures, signed approvals and meeting records.
- Jira: change requests, incident tickets and remediation records.
- Okta: user access grants, group membership changes and periodic access reviews.
A day in the life: the compliance manager before and after
Before: a compliance manager spends the first week of each audit cycle emailing control owners, locating a quarter's worth of access reviews and checking whether each ticket was closed by an authorised person. Two controls turn out to have no evidence at all, discovered a fortnight before fieldwork begins.
After: each morning the manager opens a summary that shows new evidence gathered overnight, which controls are on track and which need attention. A missing access review was flagged in week three of the quarter, the owner was notified through the normal process and the review was completed well before the audit window.
- Evidence is mapped to controls as it appears, not reconstructed later.
- Control owners receive targeted, specific requests rather than generic reminders.
- The manager spends the audit period on judgement calls, not document retrieval.
How are governance, security and permissions handled?
Governance is designed in from the start. Claude respects existing permissions in SharePoint, Jira and Okta, so it cannot reveal records that a user is not already allowed to see. Every evidence item it gathers is logged with its source, the time it was collected and the control it was mapped to, giving your auditors a clear trail.
Claude drafts, checks and prepares. People approve. A named control owner confirms that each piece of evidence is accurate and sufficient before it is accepted. Claude does not decide that a control is effective; that judgement stays with your risk and audit functions. The Anthropic Trust Center sets out the security and compliance information relevant to your review: Anthropic Trust Center.
- Access follows each system's existing permissions.
- Full logging of sources, timestamps and control mappings.
- Named human approval before any evidence is marked as accepted.
How do you measure success?
Measure the change in preparation effort, the timing of gap discovery and the quality of evidence at audit. Track the number of controls with current evidence at any given time, the number of gaps identified more than a month before fieldwork and the hours spent by the compliance team on retrieval versus review.
Review results quarterly with your audit committee or executive risk forum. Adjust the mapping of controls to sources where evidence is consistently hard to find, and expand coverage once the first set of controls is running reliably.
- Days spent on evidence retrieval before and after each audit cycle.
- Gaps identified early versus those found during fieldwork.
- Share of controls with current, approved evidence on any given date.
How should you start?
Begin with a free automation audit. We map your control framework, identify the sources where evidence already lives, and select a small set of high-value controls for a first build. Typical first phases focus on access reviews, change management and policy attestations, because they produce regular, well-structured evidence.
Build in a controlled environment with your compliance and IT teams, test the mappings against last cycle's audit file, then roll out to wider control sets. Your own cloud account hosts the solution, with hosting in the region that suits your data requirements.
- Start with one framework and a limited set of controls.
- Test against an audit cycle you have already completed.
- Expand coverage only after owners are confident in the outputs.
How it works
Map your controls
Each control in your framework is linked to the kinds of evidence that prove it, such as an approved policy or a closed ticket.
Gather evidence on schedule
Claude collects relevant items from SharePoint, Jira and Okta, respecting each user's existing access.
Label and date each item
Every piece of evidence is tagged with its control, source and collection date.
Flag gaps early
Controls with missing, stale or unapproved evidence are highlighted to the named owner.
Owners approve
A control owner confirms each item before it is accepted into the audit file.
Audit file ready on demand
The compliance team can produce a complete, traceable evidence pack whenever the auditor asks.
Before and after
Locating access reviews for the quarter
BeforeDays of emails and manual searching across folders and systems.
AfterGathered automatically, with owners prompted for any missing review.
Checking that tickets were properly closed
BeforeSampled by hand, often only weeks before fieldwork.
AfterChecked continuously against your approval rules and flagged when wrong.
Discovering control gaps
BeforeFound during audit fieldwork, when fixes are urgent.
AfterFlagged months ahead, while there is time to remediate calmly.
Compiling the evidence pack
BeforeA rushed assembly exercise by senior staff.
AfterA traceable, approved file ready on demand.
What leaders typically see
- 30–50%Typical reduction in time teams spend retrieving audit evidence
- MonthsTypical lead time for identifying control gaps before fieldwork
- ContinuousTypical coverage of evidence status rather than periodic snapshots
Typical ranges. Your free audit sets a baseline for your own organisation.
What it means for each leader
- Chief Risk Officer
- A live view of control coverage and early warning of gaps, rather than surprises at audit.
- Chief Financial Officer
- Lower preparation cost and fewer disruptions to finance and operations teams during audit periods.
- Chief Information Security Officer
- Access evidence drawn from Okta and reviewed on a schedule, strengthening the security control environment.
- General Counsel
- A clear, traceable record of evidence and approvals to support regulatory and contractual obligations.
- Chief Executive Officer
- Confidence that certifications and audits are on track, with fewer last-minute escalations to the board.
United States, United Kingdom, India and the Middle East
United States
US organisations may need to align evidence practices with state privacy laws such as California's CCPA/CPRA and sector rules such as SOX for public companies or HIPAA in healthcare. US hosting is available for the solution.
United Kingdom
UK organisations often align evidence with UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, and with sector regulators such as the FCA where relevant. UK hosting is available for the solution.
India
Indian organisations may need to consider the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and sector regulators such as RBI, SEBI or IRDAI where relevant. India hosting is available for the solution.
Middle East
Organisations in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and free zones such as DIFC and ADGM may face the UAE Personal Data Protection Law, Saudi Arabia's Personal Data Protection Law overseen by SDAIA, and Qatar's data protection law. Data-residency needs are assessed in the free audit and the deployment region is chosen to meet them; in-country hosting is not guaranteed. Arabic-language needs are considered during design.
Safeguards built in
- Access follows each system's existing permissions, so no one sees records they could not already see.
- Every evidence item is logged with its source, collection time and control mapping.
- Named control owners approve all evidence before it is accepted.
- Claude does not judge whether a control is effective; that remains with risk and audit functions.
- Solutions are deployed in your own cloud account, with agreed hosting regions.
- Regular review of mappings and outputs keeps the system aligned with your framework.
From audit to rollout
Free automation audit Weeks 1–2
We map your control framework, identify evidence sources and agree the first set of controls.
Controlled build and test Weeks 3–8
We build the connections and mappings, then test them against a completed audit cycle with your team.
Live pilot Weeks 9–14
Owners use the system on a limited control set, and we refine the flags and approval steps.
Scale-up Weeks 15 onwards
Coverage expands across frameworks and control families, with quarterly reviews with leadership.
The Claude products behind it
Security and compliance information.
Secure links between Claude and business tools.
Frequently asked questions
What does doing nothing cost?
Manual evidence collection consumes senior time each audit cycle and often reveals gaps late, when remediation is costly. Findings raised during fieldwork can extend audit scope and affect confidence with boards, customers and regulators. Continuous collection reduces these risks.
Is the evidence secure?
Claude connects through each system's existing access controls, so it sees only what the user is permitted to see. Every item is logged, and the Anthropic Trust Center provides security and compliance information for your review.
Where is our data held?
The solution is deployed in your own cloud account, in a region that suits your requirements, such as India, the United States, the United Kingdom or the European Union. Data-residency needs are confirmed during the free audit.
How accurate is the mapping of evidence to controls?
Mappings are tested against a completed audit cycle before go-live, and control owners approve every item. Claude prepares and flags; people decide what is accepted. Accuracy improves as mappings are refined.
Will this change how my staff work?
Control owners receive specific, targeted requests rather than broad reminders, which typically reduces interruptions. Compliance staff spend more time on review and judgement and less on document retrieval.
How long does a first build take?
A first build with a limited set of controls typically takes around three months from audit to live pilot, depending on the number of sources and the complexity of your framework.
Which Microsoft 365 tools and licences are needed?
SharePoint is the main source for policies and approvals. Access to Microsoft Graph is set up under your existing Microsoft 365 arrangements. Jira and Okta connections depend on your current subscriptions, which we confirm in the audit.
Does this work outside the United States and United Kingdom?
Yes. We support organisations in India and the Middle East, where regulatory requirements differ. Regional needs are assessed during the audit so the design reflects local obligations.