Keep the GRC. Replace the spreadsheets next to it.
AirTee.ai doesn't try to be Archer. It replaces the operational tooling Archer never quite reached — incident command, BCM, exercises, AI After-Action — and writes the outcomes back into Archer's controls catalogue and risk register.
A clean division of labour, not a replacement decision.
Archer is an enterprise GRC platform with deep heritage in the controls catalogue, risk register, internal audit workflow and policy management. For organisations that have spent years configuring it — and most that own Archer have — ripping it out for a resilience point-solution would be a strategic mistake. The investment in Archer's risk taxonomy, controls library and audit posture is real and worth keeping.
The honest gap, though, is what sits next to Archer in most resilience programmes: a folder of BIA spreadsheets, a separate IR tool (PagerDuty, ServiceNow), a Word template for AARs, and a calendar of tabletops nobody runs in a tool. That is the layer AirTee replaces. It is also the layer where most of the operational pain lives.
AirTee runs as the operational resilience workspace next to Archer. Incidents, exercises, BIAs and AARs happen in AirTee. Control updates, evidence and risk-register entries export from AirTee for import into Archer. The result is one source of truth for controls (Archer) and one source of truth for operations (AirTee).
Side-by-side, by capability.
Where Archer is genuinely strong (audit, controls catalogue, policy, ERM), we don't compete. Where AirTee replaces the layer next to Archer, we say so explicitly.
| Capability | Archer (RSA Archer / Archer IRM) | AirTee.ai |
|---|---|---|
Enterprise risk register | ●Core strength | ◐Resilience-scoped only |
Controls catalogue & evidence | ●System of record | ◐Import via CSV and API; no native Archer connector |
Internal audit workflow | ●Yes | ○No |
Policy management | ●Yes | ○No |
Business Impact Assessment | ●Form-driven, periodic | ●Living BIA, telemetry-fed |
Resilience / Continuity Plans | ●Template-driven | ●Tied to live dependency graph |
Live incident command | ○No | ●AI-augmented commander surface |
Regulator notification clocks | ◐Tracker only | ●Per-jurisdiction, automated |
AI After-Action Report | ○No | ●AI-drafted from the incident record |
Exercises & tabletops | ◐Manual scheduling | ●AI-generated scenarios and grading; annual planner |
Vendor / third-party risk | ●Questionnaire-native | ●Graph-native, concentration and country risk visualised |
Bi-directional integration | ●REST API | ●REST API and CSV |
The Archer-owned layer.
- ▍Enterprise risk register and risk taxonomy.
- ▍Controls catalogue and control library — single source of truth.
- ▍Internal audit workflow, audit packs, and audit evidence repository.
- ▍Policy management, policy attestation, and policy lifecycle.
- ▍Procurement-side third-party assurance questionnaires.
The AirTee-owned layer.
- ▍Live incident command — the war room with AI co-pilot, runbooks, regulator clocks.
- ▍Living BIAs and Resilience Plans, fed by real telemetry and real incidents.
- ▍Exercises and tabletops with AI-generated scenarios and grading.
- ▍AI After-Action Reports drafted in seconds, with proposed control updates.
- ▍Live operational vendor and supply-chain risk (concentration, telemetry, real-time posture).
How the AirTee → Archer wiring actually works.
Owners, assets and the controls catalogue are imported from Archer into AirTee via CSV and API, so AirTee operates against the same risk taxonomy auditors see.
In the other direction, every AirTee artefact that has audit weight — closed incidents, AAR-derived control updates, exercise outcomes, vendor risk events, BIA divergences — is posted back to Archer with full lineage. The Archer record links to the AirTee record; the AirTee record links to the Archer entry. Auditors who already know Archer get a complete view without learning a new tool, and resilience operators who use AirTee daily never have to context-switch.
Customers running this pattern describe two consistent outcomes: audit evidence preparation gets lighter, because AirTee writes evidence as a side-effect of operations rather than as a separate workstream; and resilience programme cycle time falls because the BIA, BCP, vendor and exercise artefacts stay current without quarterly catch-up sprints.
Quick answers
- Should we replace Archer?
- Usually no — for the GRC system of record, Archer is well-established and deeply embedded in many enterprise risk programmes. AirTee replaces the operational resilience pieces (incident command, BCM, exercises, AAR) and feeds outcomes into Archer rather than competing with it.
- How does the integration work?
- There is no native Archer connector. Owners, assets and the controls catalogue stay in Archer as the single source of truth; AirTee imports the part it needs via CSV and API, and evidence exports back out.
- Where does Archer fall short for resilience?
- Three places: live incident command (Archer is a system of record, not an operational surface), living BIAs (Archer's BIA module is form-driven and periodic), and AI After-Action (Archer ships no AI drafting layer).
- Can the same team use both day-to-day?
- Yes. Most resilience teams that run AirTee + Archer use AirTee as the daily operational workspace and check in to Archer for risk reporting, audit packs, and control catalogue maintenance. The two platforms keep each other in sync without manual reconciliation.
- What about Archer's vendor / third-party risk module?
- Archer's third-party module is questionnaire-native and good for procurement assurance. AirTee's vendor risk module is graph-native (live concentration risk, dependency mapping, telemetry-driven posture). Many customers run Archer for procurement assurance and AirTee for live operational vendor risk.
See AirTee in your environment.
We'll model one of your real scenarios live.