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. The resulting control updates, evidence, and risk-register entries flow into Archer via the bi-directional integration. The result is one source of truth for controls (Archer) and one source of truth for operations (AirTee), with no manual double-keying between them.
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 | ◐Reads from Archer; writes evidence back |
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 | ●<30s with control mappings |
Exercises & tabletops | ◐Manual scheduling | ●AI controller, scenarios from real incident history |
Vendor / third-party risk | ●Questionnaire-native | ●Graph-native, telemetry-fed |
Bi-directional integration | ●REST API | ●Native Archer connector |
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 as the controller.
- ▍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.
AirTee's Archer connector is bi-directional and ships day-one. Owners, assets, and the controls catalogue sync from Archer into AirTee, so AirTee is always operating 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 report two consistent outcomes: audit evidence preparation drops by 60–80%, 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?
- AirTee writes incidents, control updates and AAR outcomes back to Archer via the Archer REST API. Owners, assets and the controls catalogue stay in Archer as the single source of truth; AirTee operates on a synced view and contributes evidence back.
- 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.