Key points
Creating a third-party SaaS approval workflow for SMB clients
- A SaaS approval policy helps MSPs evaluate, approve, and monitor third-party applications before deploying them across client environments.
- SaaS evaluation checklists should examine vendor security, compliance certifications, data handling, licensing cost, and business impact.
- To streamline approvals: Create a request form, route results into a centralized system, and assign roles and approvers with a definite response timeframe.
- Classify apps under approval into low, medium, or high-risk using a risk-based decision matrix to sort apps for fast-tracking or further reviews.
- Utilize NinjaOne services to flag non-compliant apps, centralize documentation, and automate alert notifications for evaluation cycles.
- Review SaaS applications quarterly or semiannually to ensure their usage, business value, security posture, and compliance certifications meet client requirements.
Third-party SaaS applications boost productivity and streamline SMB workflows, resulting in more work done at a faster rate. An established approval workflow for SaaS apps helps MSPs evaluate, approve, and monitor third-party SaaS applications, minimizing risks and compliance issues.
Recommended strategies to craft an effective SaaS evaluation workflow
Without an existing evaluation process, employees and personnel could independently sign up for third-party apps. Unchecked SaaS subscriptions can cause security risks, compliance issues, or waste organizational resources on redundant services.
A SaaS evaluation checklist balances security and workflow convenience, promoting good IT asset management practices for clients. This provides MSPs with visibility to permit or deny pending approvals without hampering clients’ ability to try new tools.
📌 Prerequisites:
- Access to vendor information and SaaS usage logs
- Defined client governance roles
- Existing PSA or ticketing system to log requests and decisions
- Optional: PowerShell access to run risk-flagging scripts
Step #1: Define the scope and evaluation criteria of SaaS approval workflows
Scope separates apps that require review from those that are safe to adopt quickly, allowing employees to understand the rules up front. Evaluation criteria, on the other hand, provide MSPs with a consistent metric to judge requests.
That said, scope and evaluation criteria are fundamental in formulating an effective SaaS approval workflow. Together, they create a streamlined, repeatable SaaS evaluation process, helping SMBs prevent shadow IT and wasted resources.
Sample scope and evaluation criteria
Scope: All third-party SaaS apps (default), or only those handling critical client data.
Evaluation Criteria:
- Security posture. Identify the security features a vendor supports, such as MFA, encryption, and sufficient admin controls (for example, role-based access).
- Compliance certification. Check if the app under review has compliance certifications, such as SOC 2 or ISO 27001. Document your findings and verify that the vendor’s compliance commitments align with client goals.
- Data handling policies. Review the app’s telemetry requirement, data retention controls, and third-party sharing procedures.
- Cost and licensing. Evaluate the pricing model and expected cost of subscription or ownership. Define the app’s potential renewal cadence, useful life, and who owns access control once integrated in a client’s production environment.
- Business relevance and ROI. Compare the target SaaS app’s function against existing licenses to avoid redundancy. Additionally, consider conducting a small pilot test to ascertain a third-party app’s potential benefits for clients.
Step #2: Create a request and review workflow to streamline SaaS governance
Forming a standardized avenue for SaaS app requests speeds up the approval process while providing clear visibility on requested apps. This also ensures that every SaaS app request is evaluated consistently, reducing potential risks and fostering efficient cost-handling for clients.
Formulate a standardized request form
Create a standardized request form that’s answerable in 5 minutes or less, and is centrally accessible for all personnel. Inside your request form, capture only the necessary details reviewers will need, such as the following:
- App name
- Business purpose
- Vendor details
- Intended users
- Data sensitivity
- Required integrations
- Licensing model
- Target start date
Route SaaS evaluation requests into a centralized system
Log new app requests within a centralized system, such as a service catalog or an IT self-service software, to maintain visibility of tool requests. Tag each request with the client name, department, and risk signal (low, medium, or high).
Fast-track low-risk apps, while medium-risk and high-risk apps require standard review, with the latter undergoing extra security and compliance review involving security, compliance, and purchasing oversight.
Assign reviewers and set response timelines
Assign a reviewer and set response timelines for each risk signal. For instance, low-risk apps can be reviewed by an MSP technician, with a target response time of one business day. Medium-risk applications can be reviewed by an MSP and client representative, with results available within three business days.
On the other hand, high-risk SaaS applications require detailed scrutiny and a complete evaluation scope. Evaluations include compliance relevance, data handling, overlap with existing tools, and business impact. To avoid stalling, an MSP lead and the relevant client department head conduct high-risk reviews within a 5-7 day timeline.
💡 Note: MSP techs and leads serve as technical advisors in this process. Their role is to provide guidance regarding an app’s technical suitability, security, and implementation.
Step #3: Assign roles and approvers within your SaaS evaluation workflow
Assign roles and approvers to clearly convey ownership across teams, avoiding stalled and orphaned tasks. Clear ownership assignments also enable faster escalations, as techs and clients know who to contact at specific points within a review cycle.
In addition, it provides a clear audit trail for accountability and compliance, proving that each decision underwent proper decision-making processes.
Sample role assignment and approvers in SaaS approval workflows
| Role | Definition | Sample assignee |
| Requester | Identifies a business problem that a third-party SaaS app can solve, and informs their MSP by submitting a request. | Any client employee |
| Business owner | Tasked to validate the relevance of SaaS apps with business objectives through demos, trials, or pilot testing. They also declare the number of seats needed for implementation or pilot groups. | Client department head |
| Technical reviewer | Responsible for evaluating whether SaaS applications meet the baseline security and compliance requirements clients need. | MSP technician or analyst |
| Finance / Procurement | Validates whether an app’s licensing, renewal, and cancellation costs fit within the budgetary allocations of a department. | Client finance officer, lead, or executive |
| Final approver | Consolidates all the findings from other reviews and decides whether to grant or deny app requests. | Client executive sponsor or IT manager |
💡 Note: MSPs serve as technical advisors, guiding clients regarding risk, security, and implementation considerations, while internal stakeholders approve tool procurement..
Step #4: Leverage a risk-based decision matrix
Risk-based matrices visualize information regarding an app’s safety by matching recommendations to its projected impact on clients. A well-defined matrix also turns subjective debates into clear, repeatable decisions, speeding up the evaluation process.
For MSPs, having a standard matrix allows them to apply the same decision-making process across all clients. A matrix can help deliver uniform service and maintain a clean audit trail. Record risk scores, decisions, and controls per client and re-score after renewals or price changes.
Sample risk-based decision matrix for SaaS approval workflows
| Risk level | Recommendation | Required controls | Approvers and SLA |
| Low | Approve with standard controls | Enforce authentication procedures (for example, SSO or MFA) and least-privilege roles if available; add to SaaS inventory. | MSP analyst; response after one business day. |
| Medium | Approve or deny after pilot tests | 30-60 day pilot test; block risky app features. | MSP analyst and client representative; response after three business days. |
| High | Deny or request further vendor assessments | 30-60 day pilot test; compliance certification review; consider alternatives. | MSP lead and client executive; response after 5-7 business days. |
Step #5: Communicate decisions and ensure compliance with SaaS applications
Clear and transparent communication closes every request, ensuring that approvals or permission denials reach stakeholders in a timely manner. Communicate decisions clearly to all personnel, along with the rationale behind them and the next steps, such as required compliance controls.
After approval, ensure that SaaS apps receive the required security configurations (for example, MFA, least-privilege roles, audit logging, and restrictions). Provision app access only to target stakeholders, provide guidelines regarding safe app usage, and regularly monitor for unusual accesses.
Add the application to a client’s SaaS inventory, including app owners, risk tier, controls in place, license count, and vendor SLAs. Centralize license management only for MSPs, ensuring that license provisioning and deprovisioning are well-documented and not ad-hoc.
Step #6: Schedule SaaS evaluations and renewal regularly
Set an automated reminder for app reevaluations for renewal or deprecation , ideally quarterly or semi-annually. Review the application’s usage outcomes, as these provide actionable insights on whether to right-size, upgrade, or retire the application.
To ensure clients stay compliant, reassess the vendor’s security and compliance posture every reevaluation period. Check SOC 2/ISO reports, data processing agreements (DPAs), and permission changes to ensure apps align with client requirements.
NinjaOne services to support SaaS app approval and governance
NinjaOne streamlines SaaS approval workflows by combining endpoint monitoring, documentation, and real-time alerts within a single-pane-of-glass software. This enables MSPs to centrally identify unauthorized tools and ensure client compliance with regulatory frameworks.
- Comprehensive device detail view: Identify potential compliance breaches by scanning app inventory data and comparing actual usage against the approved apps list.
- Documentation management: Store SaaS app evaluation requests centrally within NinjaOne documentation modules to make information accessible and transparent across technicians.
- Custom alerts: Set up custom alerts in NinjaOne to automatically notify technicians when SaaS evaluation periods are about to start or end, ensuring timely reviews and preventing lapses in oversight.
Employ an approval workflow for SaaS apps to streamline evaluation processes
SaaS app approval policies can protect SMB clients from security gaps, compliance risks, and redundant, costly software. To initiate the approval workflow, define the scope and evaluation criteria, then route the results to a centralized system for better visibility..
Assign roles with defined response timeframes and use automation tools, such as NinjaOne, whenever possible, to minimize manual intervention. This allows MSPs to consistently review app requests without limiting innovative ideas that can streamline clients’ business processes.
Related topics:
