Be prepared for a Quest audit
Since the early 2000s software audits have proved to be a profitable revenue stream for software publishers. A study conducted by Flexera shows that 75% of companies are found to be out of compliance with their contractual obligations, and 20% of them end up paying $1 million or more in license true-ups.
Typically, in most audit engagements the software vendors are seen as the bad guys. Software vendors’ selection process, tactics, procedures and even timing for software audits have gained a somewhat bad reputation over the years. However, the truth is that they have legal rights to verify whether their customers are following the agreed-upon contractual usage terms.
As for other already well-known vendors such as Oracle or Microsoft, the same also applies to Quest. Since its acquisition in 2012, Quest’s compliance program is in motion with a notable increase in volume of audit campaigns. Francisco Partners, former owner of Attachmate Corporation, is notoriously known for their aggressive compliance practices with rapid legal escalations. Word on the street has it that their involvement in Quest has had a similar effect, take the Nike lawsuit as an example.
To help you be prepared in case an audit letter from Quest will land on your desk, or for you to just better understand Quest’s auditing process, we put together a whitepaper that will walk you through the Most common criteria for audit nominations, the Types of Quest auditsand the Audit phases, followed by a dive into the Most common causes for Quest compliance issuesand Best practices, that will help you proactively improve your IT strategy.
Read our whitepaper and stay ahead of the game. In case you have questions related to Quest’s software audit process, don’t hesitate to reach out to us.
This article was published on 23-10-2018