You've spent months perfecting your GRC architecture, implementing a central data layer, and orchestrating your controls.

Your systems are well-designed, but your engineers still ignore your requests, your evidence collection process feels like pulling teeth, and compliance feels more adversarial than collaborative.

This scenario plays out in organisations everywhere.

Sophisticated GRC platforms sit underutilised.

Carefully designed workflows gather digital dust.

Meticulously documented processes exist only in theory.

Something I hear very often: "I thought technology would solve our communication problems. Instead, I've just created more efficient ways for engineers to ignore our requests."

This reveals a limitation of GRC Engineering: Even the most elegant technical architecture will fail without effective human interfaces between teams.

Here's how to build the Human API that turns technical possibilities into operational realities.

IN PARTNERSHIP WITH

Supply Chain Detection and Response tackles your core GRC challenge

Maintaining continuous visibility across hundreds of vendors. We provide factor-based security ratings, automated assessments based on threat intelligence, and response capabilities to address vulnerabilities before they trigger findings.

Our platform eliminates manual collection processes while delivering the documentation required for audit evidence. Explore how we can help your enterprise.

Why It Matters 🔍

The why: the core problem this solves and why you should care

Let's be honest, most GRC-engineering relationships fail not because of technical limitations but because of communication breakdowns.

Some examples worth mentioning:

• Most GRC teams report significant friction when working with engineering teams

• Engineers view compliance activities as low-value work that pulls them away from core responsibilities

• GRC professionals spend a substantial portion of their time following up on unaddressed requests

• Both sides grow increasingly frustrated with each interaction

This dysfunction is dangerous.

When GRC and engineering interact poorly, critical security gaps go unaddressed, remediation timelines stretch indefinitely, and both teams build increasingly antagonistic relationships.

The broken human interface becomes your organisation's biggest vulnerability, one no security tool can patch.

While engineering teams are comfortable with APIs and integration points between systems, they often lack clear protocols for interacting with GRC teams. By designing these interfaces with the same care you apply to technical systems, you create predictable, efficient interactions that both teams can rely on.

Strategic Framework 🧩

The what: The conceptual approach broken down into 3 main principles

Building an effective Human API requires a deliberate approach with clear principles. Here are the three core components of a successful GRC-engineering interface:

Standardised Communication Protocols

Just as technical APIs have standardised request formats, successful GRC-engineering relationships need consistent communication structures. This means developing:

• Common terminology that bridges compliance and technical language

• Regular interaction cadences that both teams can rely on

• Clear request formats that include all necessary context

• Defined response expectations for acknowledgment and completion

When both teams understand how to communicate, when to communicate, and what to expect from each interaction, friction disappears. But this standardisation must be developed collaboratively, not imposed. This approach builds directly on the team interface concepts we discussed in our GRC Architecture framework.

Contextual Translation Layers

Technical APIs transform data between systems. Your Human API must transform context between teams. This translation layer should:

• Convert compliance requirements into engineering-friendly formats

• Connect security objectives to engineering priorities

• Translate technical constraints into compliance implications

• Reframe compliance timelines within engineering workflows

The most successful GRC professionals serve as bilingual translators - fluent in both compliance and engineering dialects. They don't just relay messages; they reformat them for maximum relevance to each audience.

Feedback Loops and Iteration

Unlike static technical interfaces, Human APIs improve through continuous feedback. Effective interfaces include:

• Regular retrospectives on what's working and what isn't

• Iteration on communication formats based on actual usage

• Performance metrics that measure interface effectiveness

• Adaptation to organisational changes as teams evolve

This dynamic nature distinguishes great Human APIs from merely adequate ones. By treating the interface as a product to be improved rather than a process to be followed, you create increasingly frictionless interactions over time.

Security Questionnaires, Solved.

We know you’re the reason compliance stays on track, but drowning in security questionnaires can feel like running in quicksand. Vendict fixes that.

Our AI-powered solution, built for GRC teams, automates responses - accurately and intelligently. With trusted names like Monday.com, Square, and others in our corner, we’re changing the game. Finally, GRC made simple! 😎

Execution Blueprint 🛠️

The how: 3 practical steps to put this strategy into action at your organisation

Step 1: Map Your Current Communication Interfaces

Start with documentation analysis

• Review the last 20 GRC-engineering interactions

• Identify patterns in successful vs. failed requests

• Note response times and completion rates

Then add qualitative insight

Look for the gaps

Visualisation opportunity: Create a simple interaction flow diagram showing:

1. Where requests originate

2. How they're transmitted

3. Common failure points

4. Information lost in translation

Step 2: Design Your Interface Specifications

Before you start

• Identify your most frequent interaction types

• Rank them by impact on security/compliance

• Start with the highest-impact interactions

The interface specification canvas

For each key interaction type:

Interaction Type: [Evidence Collection]
----------------
Request Format:
  Required context: [List elements]
  Supporting information: [List elements]
  Success criteria: [Clear definition]

Response Expectations:
  Acknowledgment time: [Timeframe]
  Completion time: [Timeframe]
  Acceptable formats: [List formats]

Escalation Path:
  Level 1: [Primary contact + timeframe]
  Level 2: [Secondary contact + trigger]
  Level 3: [Final escalation + conditions]

Test your designs: Run a simple pilot with a receptive engineering team. Have them rate each interaction on:

• Clarity (1-5)

• Reasonableness (1-5)

• Actionability (1-5)

Refine based on scores below 4.

Step 3: Build Your Human Middleware Network

Identify your translators

Think less about roles and more about characteristics:

🔄 Bridge Builders - People who naturally connect teams
🔍 Context Providers - Those who understand the "why" behind requests
⚙️ Technical Translators - Can convert compliance to technical requirements
🛡️ Security Champions - Engineers who already care about security

Create a deliberate connection strategy

Instead of vague "build relationships" advice, try this structured approach:

1. Weekly: Brief embed sessions (GRC sitting with engineering for 2 hours)

2. Bi-weekly: Joint problem-solving workshops on real compliance challenges

3. Monthly: Cross-team lunch & learns where each side teaches the other

4. Quarterly: Relationship retrospectives to assess interface effectiveness

Measure what matters

Final insight

Don't worry about perfect implementation. Even basic standardization beats ad-hoc processes. The relationships you build during this process often deliver more value than the formal interfaces themselves.

Track small wins obsessively and celebrate progress publicly. Nothing builds momentum like visible success.

Content Queue 📖

The learn: This week's resource to dive deeper on the topic

In this LinkedIn Learning Course, GRC for the Cloud-Native Revolution, I’ve discussed how to create better relationships with engineers.

Sometimes, it’s as simple as getting some coffee chats scheduled and not reaching out only when you need to collect evidence before an audit!

That’s all for this week’s issue, folks!

If you enjoyed it, you might also enjoy:

• My spicier takes on LinkedIn [/in/ayoubfandi]

• Listening to the GRC Engineering Podcast 

  • Spotify

  • Youtube

  • Apple Podcasts

See you next week!