A compelling demonstration can make a new compliance tool feel like an immediate answer. But for organizations working toward CMMC and NIST SP 800-171 requirements, the better starting point is the problem, not the product. Kaleigh Floyd and Bobby Guerra frame their discussion around resisting the “ooh, shiny new tool” impulse on the conference floor in the most recent episode of Climbing Mount CMMC. Drawing on their MSP experience, they describe a more deliberate approach: define the job, involve the right people, understand the data implications, and test before committing.
Define the job before choosing the solution
A tool is only one possible answer to an organizational problem. The real fix may be a process, a procedure, or a hire. Buying software before identifying the need can leave a team with another product to manage while the original problem remains unresolved. Start by describing the gap and the outcome the organization needs. Then, ask whether technology is necessary to close it. That distinction helps teams evaluate products against a defined purpose rather than the appeal of a demonstration.
Purchase in Stages. Implement One Tool at a Time
A purchase is not the end of the work. Onboarding a tool creates tasks across procedures, documentation, teams, and compliance validation. Introducing several products at once can make those changes harder to coordinate and evaluate. Be sure to implement one tool at a time. Assign a project point of contact and involve your GRC team(s), implementation, support, and compliance stakeholders in the evaluation. The people responsible for deployment and ongoing use need a voice before the organization commits.
Understand Supply-Chain Risk and Data Scope
Tool selection is also a supply-chain risk decision. Teams should assess the provider and classify the proposed tool’s role: does it provide security, store CUI, or do both? The type of data involved and where it is hosted affect scope and requirements. That assessment belongs early in the evaluation and not after deployment. A product’s features alone do not establish whether it fits an organization’s CMMC compliance needs. Teams also need to understand how the service will interact with their environment and the information they must protect.
Let the Users Test the Promise
After vendor meetings, debrief with the people who will actually use the tool. Their perspective can reveal a mismatch between a polished demonstration and the team’s operational needs. Give those users an opportunity to trial the product before making a commitment. A practical evaluation should connect the trial to the original problem. Can the team use the tool to perform the intended job? What work will adoption create for implementation and support? What questions remain for GRC and compliance stakeholders? These are useful prompts for turning vendor enthusiasm into an informed decision.
Test Before Rebuilding the Documentation
Build testing into change management before rewriting system documentation around a product. The SSP, network design, procedures, and controls should not be reshaped around an untested assumption that a tool will work as expected. The sequence matters: evaluate the proposed change, test it, and use the results to inform the documentation updates. This approach keeps purchasing, implementation, and compliance work connected rather than treating them as separate decisions.
Ask the MSP How the Tool Was Assessed
Organizations seeking certification (OSCs) should ask their MSPs how proposed tools were evaluated and whether they fit the organization’s CMMC compliance needs. A recommendation should be accompanied by an explanation of the need it addresses, the risks considered, and the implications for the customer’s environment. That conversation should include data handling, hosting, testing, and documentation, not just product capabilities. It gives OSC customers a clearer basis for understanding why a tool is being proposed and what adopting it will require.
Recognize When Patience is the Safer Strategy
It’s vital to use FedRAMP inheritance and built-in GCC components to avoid unnecessary tools. There’s a lot of value in examining what is already available before adding another product. It is a reason to assess existing capabilities, not a blanket claim that any particular offering satisfies an organization’s requirements. It’s also important to wait for ecosystem maturity before adopting a FedRAMP offering. When fit or readiness remains uncertain, patience can be the safer strategy. A deliberate pause leaves room to evaluate dependencies, and practical adoption needs rather than letting a product’s appeal set the timeline.
A Practical Checklist Before Committing
- Define the problem and consider whether a process, procedure, or hire would solve it.
- Stage purchasing and implement one tool at a time.
- Name a project point of contact and involve GRC, implementation, support, and compliance stakeholders.
- Assess supply-chain risk, the tool’s security role, CUI handling, and hosting implications.
- Debrief vendor meetings with users and let the team trial the product.
- Build testing into change management before revising the SSP, network design, system documentation, or controls.
- Ask the MSP to explain the assessment and the fit with the OSC’s CMMC compliance needs.
- Review existing capabilities and consider waiting when the ecosystem is not yet mature.
The central lesson is straightforward: choose tools because they meet a defined need, not because they caught your attention. For CMMC and NIST SP 800-171 teams, disciplined evaluation (and sometimes the decision to wait) can be more valuable than the next purchase.