Manual Governance vs Continuous Compliance

Developers should learn and use Manual Governance when working in contexts with high regulatory requirements, critical security needs, or complex organizational policies, as it ensures thorough human oversight to mitigate risks and enforce standards meets developers should learn and implement continuous compliance when working in regulated industries (e. Here's our take.

Manual Governance

Nice Pick

Developers should learn and use Manual Governance when working in contexts with high regulatory requirements, critical security needs, or complex organizational policies, as it ensures thorough human oversight to mitigate risks and enforce standards

Pros

• It is particularly valuable for compliance audits, sensitive data handling, or legacy systems where automated tools may be insufficient, but it can slow down development cycles compared to automated approaches
• Related to: compliance-management, risk-assessment

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Continuous Compliance

Developers should learn and implement Continuous Compliance when working in regulated industries (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: devsecops, ci-cd-pipelines

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Manual Governance if: You want it is particularly valuable for compliance audits, sensitive data handling, or legacy systems where automated tools may be insufficient, but it can slow down development cycles compared to automated approaches and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Continuous Compliance if: You prioritize g over what Manual Governance offers.

The Bottom Line

Manual Governance wins

Developers should learn and use Manual Governance when working in contexts with high regulatory requirements, critical security needs, or complex organizational policies, as it ensures thorough human oversight to mitigate risks and enforce standards