xGRC · executable GRC
Most GRC platforms take dictation. Ours does the work.
e-Beyonder reads your production data, runs your controls, triggers remediation and calculates your net risk scores. Nothing is asserted where it can be measured.
5 days
from the day your server is made available: process-risk-control nexus, accounts and org structure in place.
÷ 4 to 5
the human control workload. On the robot path, human analysis disappears entirely — only remediation remains.
> 90 %
of execution volume runs through the robot path, as permanent control over short periods.
Live at
Allianz Maroc
And three further organisations: a metalworking subcontractor serving the nuclear and aerospace supply chains, a social housing provider, a banking and insurance operator.
Only one of them has authorised us to name it. The others stay unnamed until they ask otherwise — the same rule we apply to their data.
Why this site shows screens
A declarative platform has nothing to show.
The screens of a declarative GRC tool are forms. You type in what you say you did, and you estimate control effectiveness by hand. There is nothing to look at — which is why the category offers diagrams, illustrations and promises instead of screenshots.
We do the opposite. Every claim on this site comes with the screen that carries it, cropped to what matters and annotated. If a page cannot show its screen, it has no argument.
"Executable" is not something you explain. It is something you watch. That is why the mechanism is on screen rather than in a pitch.
The views shown here are illustrative, non-contractual representations, deliberately pared back. Our real screens carry a density of structured data we do not publish. You will see them in a demonstration, on a case of your own.
The underlying point
None of these obligations are new.
Business continuity has been required for some twenty years. ICT and outsourcing risk management for around ten. DORA did not create these requirements — it consolidated them, harmonised them, and made them enforceable.
-
2006
Joint Forum high-level principles for business continuity, following on from the Basel II operational risk framework.
-
2019-2020
EBA guidelines on ICT and security risk management, and on outsourcing arrangements.
-
2025
DORA applies. The same requirements, now examinable and sanctionable.
Between the two ends of that line, few institutions kept their framework current from end to end. This is not a question of willingness. A register is filled in once, a continuity plan is written once, a control plan is documented once — then the organisation moves, and the framework stays where it was left.
Keeping a declarative framework current by hand costs more than not doing it. That is a rational calculation — and it is exactly what an executable framework makes obsolete: it is not maintained, it runs.
Financial services is the best-documented case, because it is the most closely watched. The mechanism itself shows up wherever a process requirement has existed for years without the tooling catching up.
xGRC · anatomy of a control execution
From setup to evidence, with no re-keying.
The control is configured once. Everything after that runs on its own, at the cadence you set. Human involvement shrinks to analysing manual controls and handling remediation.
-
01
Scheduling
Configured once. The scheduler creates every future occurrence.
-
02
Loading
At due date the occurrence pulls your production data. No replication, no re-keying.
-
03
Execution
Robot for over 90 % of volume. Controller for the rest, overall or checklist-weighted.
-
04
Remediation
The failure is tied to its risk and the plan starts — continuously, whatever the control cadence.
-
05
Worklists
Each role lands on the step that concerns them: evidence, controls, remediation.
Gross and net scoring
A net score that is calculated, not an opinion.
In a declarative system, residual risk is inherent risk multiplied by a control effectiveness someone estimated. That is a judgement — and a judgement does not stand up to a regulator.
In e-Beyonder, the performance of every control is measured from its execution. The net score that follows is calculated, auditable and defensible.
These scores do not stop at the individual risk. They roll up by risk type, along your own taxonomy, into an exposure map of the whole organisation — where risk concentrates, and on which type.
And you see where a risk is moving. A risk can change in nature without changing in level: a single number will not tell you that, and a risk committee needs to know before an incident does the telling.
A score has two factors, so it has two routes down. An executed control lowers likelihood. A sized continuity plan lowers impact. Both are computed here, in the same system.
Compliance and standards
From the source text to the score, unbroken.
The legal, regulatory and normative corpus — IT standards included — enters the system as raw material. Compliance risks are created automatically from it, brought under control, then scored like any other. No one retypes them into a register.
- 01 · Source text
- 02 · Assessment
- 03 · Automatic creation
- 04 · Brought under control
- 05 · Score
The model
Everything in one place. Executed.
The process is the core. Everything else orbits it: risks surface at the task, controls execute there, and procedures are derived from the design rather than written alongside it. That is what removes the re-keying — and the silos.
And the relationship runs both ways. Every station acts back on the process: an incident moves a risk, a remediation corrects a step, a review changes how the work is done. Those are the light traces returning to the centre.
Feedback effect of the station on the process
Select a station to locate it on the arm and isolate its return to the core.
Non-financial risk coverage: operational, legal, regulatory and standards compliance, contractual service under DORA, fraud, and people and security risk. e-Beyonder exports to and interfaces with your other systems; it does not compute capital or solvency.
Sector-independent
No industry screens. Processes.
e-Beyonder does not ship industry screens. It ships processes — yours, from the inventory through to execution — and the risk framework attaches to them at the task. What holds for a claims settlement holds for a machining operation or for allocating a home.
Three examples, taken as far apart as we could find them
Three different pressures — a regulator, a customer, a public-service duty — and one question put to all three: prove it. Yours does not need to be on that list for the mechanics to apply: it only needs to have processes, and someone to account to for them.
The bridge
Live in five working days.
Changing your risk platform is daunting, and reasonably so: the cost, the delay and the migration risk are all real. We have reduced them to a week of work.
The count starts the day your server is made available. Five working days later: process-risk-control nexus in place, accounts and org structure configured. You are in production. Everything after that extends at your pace — one process, one control, one line of defence at a time.
e-Beyonder runs on your own servers. We do not offer SaaS: your production data never leaves your estate, and that is a choice rather than a limitation.
Beyonder Systems is established in Luxembourg. With deployment on your own servers, your control framework and your data stay inside your perimeter.
IN PLACE ON DAY FIVE
Day 1 = your server made available
- —Platform installed and reachable on your server
- —Organisational structure and user accounts
- —Risk register and associated controls, wired into the nexus
- —First controls configured and scheduled
- —Worklists open, by role
Priced per server, not per user. The whole organisation reaches its procedures, policies and risks, and anyone can create a control.
Thirty minutes, one of your controls, running.
No general presentation. Describe a control you run today, and we configure it and run it in front of you on a sample dataset.