In the last few years, I was directly involved in five cloud vendor audits: three for Azure competencies (migration + modernisation) and two for AWS, including the migration-related one. After you do a few of them, you understand that audit is not only about “having the right architecture”. It is mainly about process, traceability, and evidence, and about being able to explain why you did something one way rather than exactly as in the vendor reference.
Below, I share the approach I use, grouped in phases: before preparation, during preparation, audit day, and after audit. This is written in a very practical way, because in real life, you don’t win with theory, you win with organisation.
1) Before you start: set the foundation (and remove surprises)
Understand requirements like a technical checklist, not like a brochure.
The first step is simple and hard: a deep understanding of the technical requirements for every section. Not only must the audit lead understand it, but the project team members who will present evidence must also understand it. I always insist on a short internal session where we translate vendor language into exactly what they want to validate.
Align legal and contractual constraints early (NDA is not a detail)
Before selecting projects, you must validate the NDA and contractual permissions. Many audits require sharing artefacts, screenshots, architecture, even SOW or meeting minutes. If you find later that the client's legal is blocking it, you lose weeks. So I recommend: legal check as a formal phase, not as an email at the end.
Define “evidence” very broadly, and make it explicit.
One big confusion in teams is: “What is evidence?” For me, evidence can be:
- a document (design, ADR, SOP, runbook)
- code or repo structure
- screenshot from cloud console or CI/CD tool
- email, Teams chat, meeting minutes
- SOW, contract excerpt, acceptance criteria
- ticket history (Jira/Azure DevOps) showing decisions and approvals
If the team thinks evidence = only Word documents, you will fail, because many strong proofs are living in systems and tools.
2) During preparation: build traceability and choose the right projects
Use an evidence index (Excel) and one controlled repository.
I always create a simple Excel evidence index with columns like: checklist item, requirement, project, evidence link/path, owner, date, status, blockers. This is the spine of the audit. In parallel, create a folder structure (access-controlled) if you need local copies, PDFs, exports, etc.
Important: every checklist line must map to a single owner and a single primary artefact. If you have 10 links per question, the audit becomes chaotic.
Select projects strategically (not only “the biggest”)
Vendors often ask for evidence across multiple projects, sometimes three projects, but in some sections, they accept evidence only from two of them. So you must map exactly: how many projects per section and which ones.
I recommend avoiding “pure automation” projects where only 1–2 roles were involved (example: only testing + dev). For audit, the best projects have a full delivery footprint: development, testing, infrastructure, CI/CD, security, and operations. Also, pick projects with good documentation, because an audit is presentation with proof.
Ensure project representatives have access to client systems
During the audit, the people representing projects must have access to all relevant client systems where evidence exists (cloud portal, CI/CD, monitoring, ticketing). If access is missing, even if you “did the work”, you cannot demonstrate it. This is one of the most common failures.
Don’t try to do it with one hero.
It is tempting to put one person in charge of all projects, but it is risky and burns them out. Better model:
- One representative per project (prepares evidence, knows context)
- One technical owner/audit lead (coordinates, validates narrative, controls quality)
- The program manager helps with the timeline, RACI, and stakeholder alignment.
Also, you must estimate effort and budget it. Audit preparation consumes real time. If you don’t reserve capacity, you will get “best effort” outputs.
Pre-assessment and dry-run are not optional
Run a pre-assessment: for each requirement, confirm that there is at least one piece of evidence and that it is accessible. Then do a dry run with the full team: go through evidence links, write short demo scripts, and rehearse Q&A. You will find broken links, missing permissions, and unclear answers, better to find internally than in front of the vendor.
3) Audit day: run it like an operation
On audit day, use a runbook with a timeline, who joins when, the escalation path, evidence links, and demo scripts with fallback screenshots. Keep demos short. If something is not 1:1 with the vendor recommendation, it is acceptable in my experience, if you can clearly motivate why you did differently and how you still meet the intent (security, reliability, governance, cost control, etc.).
Also, for cloud vendor audits, SMEs should have an overall understanding of the project: infrastructure, CI/CD, and architecture. If only app people attend, many questions remain unanswered.
4) After audit: close the loop
Do a short lessons learned session and update your internal templates (landing zone design notes, cost calculation approach, governance SOPs). This is how the next audit becomes easier.
Final thought
A successful audit does not need to be perfect. It is about clarity, evidence, and traceability. If you prepare with structure, the right projects, the right people, and a strong evidence index, the audit becomes predictable, and even useful, because it forces good discipline in delivery.
Comments
Post a Comment