Feature Request: Temporary / Deputy Risk Owner
We would like to request the ability to assign a Temporary (Deputy) Risk Owner within 3rdRisk for a defined period of time (vacation etc). Requirement: The Primary Risk Owner remains unchanged A Temporary / Deputy Risk Owner can be assigned. The assignment is valid from date X to date Y. The temporary role activates and deactivates automatically based on the selected dates. During the active period: The deputy receives all notifications and alerts. New issues and tasks are also assigned/visible to the deputy. The deputy can manage and update issues. All actions remain fully audit logged. Benefits: No permanent ownership changes. No manual reassignment of issues. Fully audit-proof (“who was responsible when”). Ensures business continuity during short absences (1–2 weeks).
Angela Bimmel About 1 month ago
High Priority
Feature Request
Feature Request: Temporary / Deputy Risk Owner
We would like to request the ability to assign a Temporary (Deputy) Risk Owner within 3rdRisk for a defined period of time (vacation etc). Requirement: The Primary Risk Owner remains unchanged A Temporary / Deputy Risk Owner can be assigned. The assignment is valid from date X to date Y. The temporary role activates and deactivates automatically based on the selected dates. During the active period: The deputy receives all notifications and alerts. New issues and tasks are also assigned/visible to the deputy. The deputy can manage and update issues. All actions remain fully audit logged. Benefits: No permanent ownership changes. No manual reassignment of issues. Fully audit-proof (“who was responsible when”). Ensures business continuity during short absences (1–2 weeks).
Angela Bimmel About 1 month ago
High Priority
Feature Request
Customizable Email Notification Preferences in 3rdRisk
As a 3rdRisk user, I would like the ability to customize my email notification settings, including which types of notifications I receive, with optional approval from a team manager. This would help prevent unnecessary emails being sent for every issue, action plan, and linkage created in the system. Description Currently, users receive multiple email notifications for every new issue, action plan, and linkage in 3rdRisk. This can lead to email overload and makes it harder to focus on the updates that are truly relevant. To improve usability and reduce notification fatigue, users should be able to configure their personal email preferences. Examples of configurable settings could include: Turning specific categories of notifications on or off (e.g., “Issues”, “Action Plans”, “Linkages”). Adjusting frequency (e.g., immediate, daily digest, weekly digest). Applying approval workflows (e.g., changes require authorization from a team manager). Additionally, to enhance clarity and efficiency, email subject lines should clearly state which specific issue or action plan the notification refers to. This prevents users from having to open multiple emails to understand what each one is about.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Customizable Email Notification Preferences in 3rdRisk
As a 3rdRisk user, I would like the ability to customize my email notification settings, including which types of notifications I receive, with optional approval from a team manager. This would help prevent unnecessary emails being sent for every issue, action plan, and linkage created in the system. Description Currently, users receive multiple email notifications for every new issue, action plan, and linkage in 3rdRisk. This can lead to email overload and makes it harder to focus on the updates that are truly relevant. To improve usability and reduce notification fatigue, users should be able to configure their personal email preferences. Examples of configurable settings could include: Turning specific categories of notifications on or off (e.g., “Issues”, “Action Plans”, “Linkages”). Adjusting frequency (e.g., immediate, daily digest, weekly digest). Applying approval workflows (e.g., changes require authorization from a team manager). Additionally, to enhance clarity and efficiency, email subject lines should clearly state which specific issue or action plan the notification refers to. This prevents users from having to open multiple emails to understand what each one is about.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Bulk import issues
Bulk import option An option is added to bulk import issues. You can upload an Excel file with all your issues and fill in the fields in the template. You can also assign the third-party directly through this file. Excel template You can download an Excel template and fill it out using your existing data.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Bulk import issues
Bulk import option An option is added to bulk import issues. You can upload an Excel file with all your issues and fill in the fields in the template. You can also assign the third-party directly through this file. Excel template You can download an Excel template and fill it out using your existing data.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Enable filtering and exporting by issue subtypes
As a report user, I want to filter and export issues based on their subtypes, so that the distinction between types and subtypes is reflected in our reports and analytics. Acceptance Criteria: Users can filter issues by subtype in the issue view. Users can include subtypes when exporting issue data. Reports and exports accurately reflect the type and subtype distinctions.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
High Priority
Feature Request
Enable filtering and exporting by issue subtypes
As a report user, I want to filter and export issues based on their subtypes, so that the distinction between types and subtypes is reflected in our reports and analytics. Acceptance Criteria: Users can filter issues by subtype in the issue view. Users can include subtypes when exporting issue data. Reports and exports accurately reflect the type and subtype distinctions.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
High Priority
Feature Request
Feature Request: Approval Workflow for Closing Action Plans
Description: Currently, action plans within the system can be closed directly by the person to act, without any intermediate approval step from the team lead. For quality assurance and risk mitigation, we would like to introduce an optional approval workflow. Requested Enhancement: Enable a configuration option that requires team lead approval before an action plan can be closed. This approval step should apply at minimum to action plans with severity levels High and Critical. If possible, we would also welcome the option to enable this approval flow for action plans of any severity level.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Feature Request: Approval Workflow for Closing Action Plans
Description: Currently, action plans within the system can be closed directly by the person to act, without any intermediate approval step from the team lead. For quality assurance and risk mitigation, we would like to introduce an optional approval workflow. Requested Enhancement: Enable a configuration option that requires team lead approval before an action plan can be closed. This approval step should apply at minimum to action plans with severity levels High and Critical. If possible, we would also welcome the option to enable this approval flow for action plans of any severity level.
Angela Bimmel About 2 months ago
Feature Request
Approval Workflow for Closing Action Plans
Add Team Lead Approval Requirement Before Closing High‑ and Critical‑Severity Action Plans Currently, action plans within the system can be closed directly by the person to act, without any intermediate approval step from the team lead. For quality assurance and risk mitigation, we would like to introduce an optional approval workflow. Enable a configuration option that requires team lead approval before an action plan can be closed. This approval step should apply at minimum to action plans with severity levels High and Critical. If possible, we would also welcome the option to enable this approval flow for action plans of any severity level.
An Anonymous User 2 months ago
Feature Request
Approval Workflow for Closing Action Plans
Add Team Lead Approval Requirement Before Closing High‑ and Critical‑Severity Action Plans Currently, action plans within the system can be closed directly by the person to act, without any intermediate approval step from the team lead. For quality assurance and risk mitigation, we would like to introduce an optional approval workflow. Enable a configuration option that requires team lead approval before an action plan can be closed. This approval step should apply at minimum to action plans with severity levels High and Critical. If possible, we would also welcome the option to enable this approval flow for action plans of any severity level.
An Anonymous User 2 months ago
Feature Request
Bulk cancelling of Assessments in Ecosystem
Hi Team is it feasible to create a feature to cancel assessment in bulk?
Ray Esajas 2 months ago
Feature Request
Bulk cancelling of Assessments in Ecosystem
Hi Team is it feasible to create a feature to cancel assessment in bulk?
Ray Esajas 2 months ago
Feature Request
Add Document Types
Pending the redesign of the Document Types list (which should be made configurable per tenant), please add the following list of Document Types for Oney Insurance (both Sandbox and Prod) TPA IPID GTC Brokerage Agreement TPA & Brokerage Agreement Product Appendix TPA & Product Appendix Termination Agreement Legal Partenariat de courtage et de gestion Contrat cadre de courtage et de gestion Insurance Intermediation Agreement Intermediation Agreement Distribution and Administration Protocol Reinsurance Treaty Partnership Agreement Brokerage and Third Party Administration Protocol
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Add Document Types
Pending the redesign of the Document Types list (which should be made configurable per tenant), please add the following list of Document Types for Oney Insurance (both Sandbox and Prod) TPA IPID GTC Brokerage Agreement TPA & Brokerage Agreement Product Appendix TPA & Product Appendix Termination Agreement Legal Partenariat de courtage et de gestion Contrat cadre de courtage et de gestion Insurance Intermediation Agreement Intermediation Agreement Distribution and Administration Protocol Reinsurance Treaty Partnership Agreement Brokerage and Third Party Administration Protocol
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Review on Contracts 2nd iteration
Could the Review functionality on Contracts be expanded with more functionality? The following is requested by De Goudse: Multiple templates: Currently it is only possible to have 1 template with review procedure. However, in some cases there are different reviews. Would it be possible to create multiple templates and schedule them? Deleting of reviews: Currently it is not possible to delete reviews Add title of review: Please add the ability to create a custom title of the review Add criticality: Please allow the possibilty to add low/medium/high/critical to a review Improve data table of reviews: Please take into account the title and criticality Bulk creation: Please allow the ability to create contract reviews in bulk Note: This request also applies to the Contract function at Third-Party level.
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Review on Contracts 2nd iteration
Could the Review functionality on Contracts be expanded with more functionality? The following is requested by De Goudse: Multiple templates: Currently it is only possible to have 1 template with review procedure. However, in some cases there are different reviews. Would it be possible to create multiple templates and schedule them? Deleting of reviews: Currently it is not possible to delete reviews Add title of review: Please add the ability to create a custom title of the review Add criticality: Please allow the possibilty to add low/medium/high/critical to a review Improve data table of reviews: Please take into account the title and criticality Bulk creation: Please allow the ability to create contract reviews in bulk Note: This request also applies to the Contract function at Third-Party level.
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Make Document Upload Types Customisable per Tenant
Suppliers or platform users that want to upload a document, can choose between more than 30 document types. Regardless this huge number, there are still (new) customers that require more document types to be added. Therefore it would be helpful if each customer can define their own document types to be used by suppliers and themselves in the backend.
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Make Document Upload Types Customisable per Tenant
Suppliers or platform users that want to upload a document, can choose between more than 30 document types. Regardless this huge number, there are still (new) customers that require more document types to be added. Therefore it would be helpful if each customer can define their own document types to be used by suppliers and themselves in the backend.
Jelle Groenendaal 3 months ago
Feature Request
Remove/archive contracts
While it is possible to archive/remove third parties, the contract usually are left behind in the system (not linked, just hanging in the air). It would be helpful if it were possible to archive/delete the contracts.
Laurynas Petraitis 3 months ago
Feature Request
Remove/archive contracts
While it is possible to archive/remove third parties, the contract usually are left behind in the system (not linked, just hanging in the air). It would be helpful if it were possible to archive/delete the contracts.
Laurynas Petraitis 3 months ago
Feature Request
Export external form (business registration form)
Hi, the current external form (business registration) (which appears as “custom fields” in the overview of the third party when editing) cannot be exported. It would be great to have the ability to export the contents of the form for audit trail
Laurynas Petraitis 3 months ago
Feature Request
Export external form (business registration form)
Hi, the current external form (business registration) (which appears as “custom fields” in the overview of the third party when editing) cannot be exported. It would be great to have the ability to export the contents of the form for audit trail
Laurynas Petraitis 3 months ago
Feature Request
Dashboard - actions
In your dashboard you see all you actions - but our actions can be Internal Control related or Risk register action related. Is it possible to make a distinction between the two. So that people will not mix the two up (and yess that is possible).
Marieta de Vos-Vermulm 4 months ago
Feature Request
Dashboard - actions
In your dashboard you see all you actions - but our actions can be Internal Control related or Risk register action related. Is it possible to make a distinction between the two. So that people will not mix the two up (and yess that is possible).
Marieta de Vos-Vermulm 4 months ago
Feature Request
Custom Issue Statuses
As an administrator, I want to define custom issue statuses so that incident management reflects real-life scenarios and supports clearer reporting and workflows. Current Situation The current incident workflow only supports three fixed statuses: Open, In Progress, and Closed. These options are too limited for many organizations and do not represent several common real-world outcomes—for example: Reported in Error Withdrawn Pending Review Awaiting Third-Party Response Because these statuses cannot be added, users often misclassify incidents or force them into incorrect categories. This reduces the accuracy of incident reporting, complicates analysis, and creates inconsistencies in the incident lifecycle. Desired Situation Administrators should be able to configure these additional incident statuses in the platform’s settings. This enhancement will enable users to reflect their actual internal processes and classify incidents accurately.
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Custom Issue Statuses
As an administrator, I want to define custom issue statuses so that incident management reflects real-life scenarios and supports clearer reporting and workflows. Current Situation The current incident workflow only supports three fixed statuses: Open, In Progress, and Closed. These options are too limited for many organizations and do not represent several common real-world outcomes—for example: Reported in Error Withdrawn Pending Review Awaiting Third-Party Response Because these statuses cannot be added, users often misclassify incidents or force them into incorrect categories. This reduces the accuracy of incident reporting, complicates analysis, and creates inconsistencies in the incident lifecycle. Desired Situation Administrators should be able to configure these additional incident statuses in the platform’s settings. This enhancement will enable users to reflect their actual internal processes and classify incidents accurately.
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Strengthening Data Quality for Better Risk-Based Governance
We’re looking to introduce improvements that help ensure key third-party and contract data stays accurate, complete, and automatically governed. What this would mean for you You’d always have a reliable view of whether a third party is truly active, with contract status and end dates consistently monitored and linked together. A third party’s overall risk level would be automatically derived from its underlying contracts (if available) using the highest classification among them, so you no longer need to reconcile this manually. And for high-risk relationships, compliance reports would be more tightly controlled: mandatory validity dates, automated reminders or requests for new reports, and preferably even an AI-powered first check before it reaches your review. Why it matters These enhancements reduce manual follow-up, prevent outdated or incomplete data, and give you stronger, more dependable governance, so you can focus on risk decisions rather than administrative tracking. 💬 Would this support the way you manage your third-party risks?
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Strengthening Data Quality for Better Risk-Based Governance
We’re looking to introduce improvements that help ensure key third-party and contract data stays accurate, complete, and automatically governed. What this would mean for you You’d always have a reliable view of whether a third party is truly active, with contract status and end dates consistently monitored and linked together. A third party’s overall risk level would be automatically derived from its underlying contracts (if available) using the highest classification among them, so you no longer need to reconcile this manually. And for high-risk relationships, compliance reports would be more tightly controlled: mandatory validity dates, automated reminders or requests for new reports, and preferably even an AI-powered first check before it reaches your review. Why it matters These enhancements reduce manual follow-up, prevent outdated or incomplete data, and give you stronger, more dependable governance, so you can focus on risk decisions rather than administrative tracking. 💬 Would this support the way you manage your third-party risks?
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Expanded Third-Party Risk Profile Input & Tracking
To streamline how users complete and maintain their Risk Profile, we’d like to extend the current functionality around the current built-in Risk profile questions. Add a Comment Field A small comment section for each Risk Profile would allow users to provide additional context or clarification. This is useful for: Explaining decisions behind certain answers Adding nuance that isn’t captured by structured fields Internal communication about Third-parties 3. “Filled In By” + Date To increase transparency and accountability, the system should automatically capture: Who completed/updated the Risk Profile On which date the action was performed This supports auditability and aligns with common governance requirements. 4. Change Tracking Each update to the Risk Profile should be logged: What changed When it changed Who made the change This provides a clear historical overview and helps teams trace developments in their risk posture over time. Would this be helpful in your workflows? Let us know by liking or commenting on this post!
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Expanded Third-Party Risk Profile Input & Tracking
To streamline how users complete and maintain their Risk Profile, we’d like to extend the current functionality around the current built-in Risk profile questions. Add a Comment Field A small comment section for each Risk Profile would allow users to provide additional context or clarification. This is useful for: Explaining decisions behind certain answers Adding nuance that isn’t captured by structured fields Internal communication about Third-parties 3. “Filled In By” + Date To increase transparency and accountability, the system should automatically capture: Who completed/updated the Risk Profile On which date the action was performed This supports auditability and aligns with common governance requirements. 4. Change Tracking Each update to the Risk Profile should be logged: What changed When it changed Who made the change This provides a clear historical overview and helps teams trace developments in their risk posture over time. Would this be helpful in your workflows? Let us know by liking or commenting on this post!
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Assessment Conclusion Templates
We’re exploring the ability to create reusable templates for assessment conclusions, so teams no longer need to rewrite the same text manually each time. Today Conclusion text must be typed from scratch for every assessment, even when the structure or wording is largely the same. Teams often copy-paste this conclusion from other places. What we’re considering Allowing admins to define standard conclusion templates that users can insert with one click and adjust where needed, ensuring consistency while saving time. 💬 Would this help streamline your assessment process?
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Assessment Conclusion Templates
We’re exploring the ability to create reusable templates for assessment conclusions, so teams no longer need to rewrite the same text manually each time. Today Conclusion text must be typed from scratch for every assessment, even when the structure or wording is largely the same. Teams often copy-paste this conclusion from other places. What we’re considering Allowing admins to define standard conclusion templates that users can insert with one click and adjust where needed, ensuring consistency while saving time. 💬 Would this help streamline your assessment process?
Guido Braam 4 months ago
Feature Request
Export dashboard widgets
Export as image or PDF: We want to allow users to export dashboard widgets as an image or PDF. We are still looking into the best format for this, and welcome your feedback. Per widget export: You can export just the widgets you need. Use filters: The exports will contain the results as determined using your filters. For example: if you filter by a certain framework, this will be reflected in the export of the widget as well.
An Anonymous User 4 months ago
Feature Request
Export dashboard widgets
Export as image or PDF: We want to allow users to export dashboard widgets as an image or PDF. We are still looking into the best format for this, and welcome your feedback. Per widget export: You can export just the widgets you need. Use filters: The exports will contain the results as determined using your filters. For example: if you filter by a certain framework, this will be reflected in the export of the widget as well.
An Anonymous User 4 months ago
Feature Request
Create Issues During the Testing Phase
We’re exploring an enhancement to allow users to create an issue directly from the testing phase when a control is found to be not effective. Today Issues are already prompted during the review of an assessment if the control has already been tested as ineffective earlier. What we’re considering Adding the same issue-creation prompt to the testing phase, so issues can be logged at the moment the finding is identified — without waiting for the review step. 💬 Would this make your workflow clearer or faster?
Guido 4 months ago
Feature Request
Create Issues During the Testing Phase
We’re exploring an enhancement to allow users to create an issue directly from the testing phase when a control is found to be not effective. Today Issues are already prompted during the review of an assessment if the control has already been tested as ineffective earlier. What we’re considering Adding the same issue-creation prompt to the testing phase, so issues can be logged at the moment the finding is identified — without waiting for the review step. 💬 Would this make your workflow clearer or faster?
Guido 4 months ago
Feature Request