Modern Treasury SCIM guide

Alteryx supports native SCIM 2.0 provisioning, but only on Enterprise plans with custom pricing (7+ users minimum). The feature requires SSO (SAML or OIDC) to be configured first and completely overrides manual user management. For teams on Professional ($5,000/user/year) or Business ($10,000-$20,000/user/year) plans, accessing SCIM means upgrading to Enterprise - often a significant cost increase for functionality that should be table stakes. This creates a provisioning gap for most Alteryx deployments. Without automated user lifecycle management, IT teams face manual onboarding/offboarding workflows, delayed access provisioning, and compliance risks around orphaned accounts. The high per-user costs make Alteryx particularly expensive to scale, and forcing an Enterprise upgrade just for basic provisioning automation compounds that challenge.

Atlan supports native SCIM 2.0 provisioning with full user and group management capabilities. However, SCIM is only available on Enterprise tier, which requires custom pricing negotiations. Additionally, SSO must be enabled before SCIM can be configured, and Atlan's pricing tiers (Starter, Premier, Enterprise) are not publicly disclosed, making cost planning difficult for IT teams. This creates a significant barrier for organizations wanting automated provisioning without committing to enterprise-level contracts. For data teams evaluating Atlan, the lack of transparent pricing means you can't budget for provisioning capabilities upfront. The SSO prerequisite also forces organizations into a specific implementation sequence that may not align with their rollout timeline.

Benchling supports SCIM provisioning, but only on Enterprise plans with custom pricing that typically starts at $1M+ annually. This creates a massive barrier: organizations on Professional plans ($20,000+/year) face a 50x+ price increase to unlock automated user provisioning. Even mid-sized life sciences teams end up paying enterprise-level licensing just to automate basic user lifecycle management. The pricing gap is so extreme that most organizations either stick with manual provisioning or delay Benchling adoption entirely. This creates a significant operational burden for IT teams managing researchers across multiple lab environments. Manual user provisioning in a platform that handles sensitive R&D data introduces compliance risks and delays researcher onboarding. When a scientist joins or leaves, IT must manually coordinate access across Benchling's complex permission structure for notebooks, entities, and workflows. For organizations with frequent collaborator access or seasonal research teams, this becomes unmanageable.