Pisys Permit to Work Alternatives
5 of 22 products that share a software category or a capability term with Pisys Permit to Work, matched on what their records document.
Alternative products to investigate
Among the products whose records share the most documented attributes with Pisys Permit to Work: IAMTech iPermit, Prometheus Group, Rapid Global, Sphera Control of Work and Tekmon (alphabetical, not a ranking).
Tekmon pays for sponsored placements on this site; its place in this list follows the same rule as every entry. Pisys Permit to Work record checked 11 October 2026. Sources and limitations in the Pisys Permit to Work profile · How candidates are matched · Already using Pisys Permit to Work? What to check before switching
Pisys Permit to Work's own record: categories, offline status, pricing and trial
Software categories: Permit to Work and Control of Work. Offline filter: Partial offline workflow. Pricing: Pisys Permit to Work has no verified published paid amount recorded (model: “Custom quote”). Pricing sources checked 28 September 2026: selected sources reviewed. Trial: trial or demo on request.
- IAMTech iPermit
Shares: Permit to Work, Control of Work, Contractor Management and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Pisys Permit to Work
Why listed: Categories shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Permit to Work and Control of Work. Tags shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Contractor Management and Risk Assessment. Capability names sharing a term: Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”; Pisys Permit to Work's “Isolations” and IAMTech iPermit's “Isolation and LOTO control”. Offline filter: IAMTech iPermit and Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow.
Where it differs: Pricing: IAMTech iPermit publishes GBP15,000/year, Small package with up to 10 named users (check product, module and purchase scope); Pisys Permit to Work has no verified published paid amount recorded. Trial: IAMTech iPermit, trial status not established; Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request. Conditional in IAMTech iPermit's record (2 of 3 capabilities): “Offline field access” and “AI-assisted oversight”.
Against Pisys Permit to Work: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: IAMTech iPermit, “Competency verification” and “Gas testing and atmospheric monitoring” (2 of 6). Pricing model: IAMTech iPermit, “Published annual package bands”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: IAMTech iPermit, “SSO and enterprise integration” (conditional); Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional).
- Prometheus Group
Shares: Permit to Work and Control of Work
Why listed, where it differs, against Pisys Permit to Work
Why listed: Categories shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Permit to Work and Control of Work. Capability names sharing a term: Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows”; Pisys Permit to Work's “Isolations” and Prometheus Group's “Isolation and lockout/tagout management”. Pricing: Prometheus Group and Pisys Permit to Work have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Prometheus Group, not yet classified; Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow. Trial: Prometheus Group, trial status not established; Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Asset Integrity Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Conditional in Prometheus Group's record (2 of 9 capabilities): “Hot-work and confined-space permit configuration” and “Barrier-health and mitigation visibility”.
Against Pisys Permit to Work: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention”. Integration capabilities: Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional); Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional).
- Rapid Global
Shares: Permit to Work and Contractor Management
Why listed, where it differs, against Pisys Permit to Work
Why listed: Categories shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Permit to Work. Tags shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Contractor Management. Capability names sharing a term: Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Rapid Global's “Hot work permit issuing”; Pisys Permit to Work's “Contractor documents” and Rapid Global's “Induction and contractor prerequisites for permits”. Pricing: Rapid Global and Pisys Permit to Work have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Rapid Global, not yet classified; Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow. Trial: Rapid Global, trial status not established; Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to Pisys Permit to Work only: Control of Work. Conditional in Rapid Global's record: “Site access methods and emergency attendance list”.
Against Pisys Permit to Work: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Rapid Global, “Approval routing and auto-approval” and “Single plan across modules, user-based pricing”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Isolations” and “Task risk assessment and RAMS context”. Pricing model: Rapid Global, “Quote-based”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: Rapid Global, “Integrations and RESTful API” (documented); Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional). Access, security and record controls: Rapid Global, “Hosting, certification and access controls” (documented); Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention” (documented) and “Permit audit trail and linked records” (documented).
- Sphera Control of Work
Shares: Permit to Work, Control of Work and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Pisys Permit to Work
Why listed: Categories shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Permit to Work and Control of Work. Tags shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Risk Assessment. Capability names sharing a term: Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Sphera Control of Work's “Permit coordination”; Pisys Permit to Work's “Isolations” and Sphera Control of Work's “Multiphase isolations”. Pricing: Sphera Control of Work and Pisys Permit to Work have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Sphera Control of Work, not yet classified; Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow. Trial: Sphera Control of Work, trial status not established; Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request. Conditional in Sphera Control of Work's record (2 of 4 capabilities): “Emergency preparedness and permit-context handoff” and “Dynamic risk pathways and bowtie-informed visualization”.
Against Pisys Permit to Work: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Sphera Control of Work, “Interactive engineering drawings” and “Shift handover”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention”. Pricing model: Sphera Control of Work, “Contact vendor”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: Sphera Control of Work, “Maintenance-work integration and risk-based scheduling” (conditional); Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional).
- Tekmon
Shares: Permit to Work, Contractor Management and Risk Assessment
Why listed, where it differs, against Pisys Permit to Work
Why listed: Categories shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Permit to Work. Tags shared with Pisys Permit to Work: Contractor Management and Risk Assessment. Capability names sharing a term: Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”; Pisys Permit to Work's “Contractor documents” and Tekmon's “Contractor prequalification, access status and certificate expiry”. Pricing: Tekmon and Pisys Permit to Work have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Tekmon, documented offline workflow; Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow. Trial: Tekmon, free trial documented; Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request. Software categories assigned to Tekmon only: EHS Management, Quality Management Systems (QMS), Inspection Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Software categories assigned to Pisys Permit to Work only: Control of Work. Conditional in Tekmon's record (2 of 5 capabilities): “CAPA assignment and approval” and “ISO 9001 / ISO 22000 process templates”.
Against Pisys Permit to Work: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Tekmon, “Cross-discipline quality and safety CAPA” and “Offline inspection forms” (2 of 14); Pisys Permit to Work, “Isolations”. Pricing model: Tekmon, “Enterprise subscription; custom quote”; Pisys Permit to Work, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: Tekmon, “ERP and reporting connections” (conditional); Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional). Access, security and record controls: Tekmon, “Document library with history and access control” (documented); Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention” (documented) and “Permit audit trail and linked records” (documented).
Continue the alternatives research
Check the same evidence-led view from each candidate's starting point; its matched set may differ because the documented record differs.
17 more not listed. Browse the Permit to Work category.
Already using Pisys Permit to Work? What its record leaves open
Limitations the Pisys Permit to Work profile records:
- No numeric subscription verified
- Offline action permissions need a task-by-task demonstration
- Illustrative API architecture is not a preconfigured connector guarantee
Available only under stated conditions or not documented (checked 11 October 2026): Mobile completion; Maximo linkage; Pisys PTW API; SIMOPS and concurrent-work visibility; Configurable permit lifecycle; Multi-site and offshore deployment. Check each against the contract you hold.
Listed candidates that document a capability with a related name (confirm the scope in a demo):
- “Configurable permit lifecycle”: IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”, Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows”, Rapid Global's “Hot work permit issuing”, Sphera Control of Work's “Permit coordination” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”.
Pisys Permit to Work evaluation checks, for every candidate
- Functional depth: Demonstrate a conflicting job and trace the rejected transition through its resolution. Source
- Usability & adoption: Observe an issuer, contractor and incoming shift using their own roles. Source
- Implementation & TCO: Compare subscription, configuration, migration, training and renewal costs for the same deployment. Source
- Integrations & API: Test a failed interface transaction and verify ownership of recovery and duplicate prevention. Source
- Security & trust: Request hosting, access, retention and recovery evidence for the contracted service. Source
Leaving Pisys Permit to Work: what to plan for
- Permit history is evidence, and it has to be exportable before the contract ends. Check that an export of a closed permit carries its timestamps, the identity of each approver, retention settings and the history of any corrections, then ask the site's control-of-work owner whether it matches the approved procedure. An export that omits the correction trail will not answer an auditor's questions later.
- Work orders in the maintenance system carry links to permits, so the interface has to be unwound as well as replaced. The record describes an exchange of work-order context and permit links, with status definitions and mappings configured per client. List every mapping and endpoint in use, name who monitors the interface today, and decide how open work orders will be handled during the changeover.
- Printed isolation tags in the field may carry codes that open linked permit and isolation records on a phone. After the cut-over those codes may lead nowhere, so plan a physical exercise: reprint, replace and check every tag, with a written procedure for damaged ones. Do it while no isolation is live, and confirm the old and new numbering cannot be confused on a lock or board.
Who may have reason to stay with Pisys Permit to Work
- Checking contractor documents in the permit context is a concrete reason to stay for a permit office that manages many firms. Competencies and supporting documents are held against both the firm and the person, with expiry alerts, so a lapsed certificate is visible where the permit is approved. A replacement that keeps contractors in a separate system would add a manual cross-check at the most time-pressured moment.
- A permit lifecycle that has been configured to your site, with its states, separation of duties and extension rules, represents work that a move would repeat. The record is clear that these rules depend on configuration and are not a default template, so the cost of leaving includes drafting and testing the same model again with the people who approve and issue permits.
- Crews who hand work back from places with poor reception rely on a documented feature. The official FAQ covers completion and hand-back while disconnected, with updates after reconnection, but the record calls this narrower than full offline operation. If the reason for leaving is issuing or changing permits without signal, check that any candidate goes further, because this one does not claim it.
What to test in a trial of a replacement for Pisys Permit to Work
- Build two permits in overlapping areas with a shared energy isolation and incompatible conditions, then see what the board shows. The record does not establish that every conflict is detected automatically, so ask each candidate to separate the checks the software performs from those that depend on a supervisor reading the plan. The answer reveals how much of simultaneous-work safety rests on people.
- Suspend a permit centrally while the handset is still disconnected, then reconnect it. Look at what the worker sees, which timestamp counts, who is notified and whether work can continue without a fresh authorisation. The record raises emergency suspension visibility as an open question for offline users, so this is the case that separates a convincing demonstration from a dependable one.
- Try to do things in the wrong order. Close a permit before its linked work is handed back, or remove a shared isolation while another permit remains live, and then lose or damage the tag. Note the blocks and warnings, the audit entries, and the route an authorised person takes to recover. Systems tend to behave well on the intended sequence and reveal their limits on the unintended one.
Conditions and sources in the Pisys Permit to Work profile · Recorded commercial terms
Pisys Permit to Work alternatives — frequently asked questions
Which Pisys Permit to Work alternatives have published amounts?
Published amounts (see each profile's product, module and purchase scope): IAMTech iPermit. No verified published paid amount recorded: Prometheus Group, Rapid Global, Sphera Control of Work and Tekmon. Pisys Permit to Work has no verified published paid amount recorded.
Which Pisys Permit to Work alternatives have a documented offline workflow?
Documented offline workflow: Tekmon. Partial offline workflow: IAMTech iPermit. Not yet classified: Prometheus Group, Rapid Global and Sphera Control of Work. Offline filter: Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow.
Which Pisys Permit to Work alternatives document a free trial?
Free trial documented: Tekmon. Trial status not established: IAMTech iPermit, Prometheus Group, Rapid Global and Sphera Control of Work. Trial: Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request.