TLDR: DevOps promised to bring balance between speed, security, and governance. In reality most organisations left GRC (Governance, Risk, and Compliance) behind. Now we have automated deployments without accountability. GRC-as-code isn’t a new idea; the tools exist (Azure Policy, CI/CD gates, telemetry), cultural gaps just stalled adoption. GRC Engineers, professionals who codify policy, embed compliance into pipelines, and make governance agile are the DevOps was supposed to deliver.
DevOps Was Supposed to Bring Balance, So Where Did GRC Engineers come in?
Why DevOps Needs GRC Engineers Now More Than Ever
As a cybersecurity consultant working with Microsoft cloud solutions, I’ve seen firsthand how DevOps promises often stall at the governance layer.
For DevOps engineers, GRC might sound like something reserved for auditors and policy teams, but that perception is part of the problem.
GRC isn’t just about checklists and documentation. In modern delivery pipelines, it’s about codifying expectations, proving accountability, and embedding trust into every deployment.
And when it’s done right, GRC isn’t a blocker, it’s the blueprint DevSecOps should’ve started with.
Let’s talk about how DevOps lost its way, and why GRC Engineers might just be the ones to bring it back.
The Movement That Could Have Been
There’s a scene in Revenge of the Sith that lives rent-free in my head every time someone posts about digital transformation:
“You were the Chosen One! You were supposed to bring balance to the Force, not leave it in ruins!”
In that moment, Obi-Wan wasn’t just talking to Anakin, he was talking to DevOps.
DevOps was never meant to be just automation and CI/CD pipelines. It was supposed to unify delivery and operations, embed security and compliance into the build process, and finally eliminate the late-night “please approve this firewall change” tickets.
It was meant to bring balance:
Speed and safety
Delivery and discipline
Flexibility and governance
But let’s be honest, in many organisations, it didn’t pan out that way.
Instead, most of what we got was:
A rebranding of sysadmins as “DevOps Engineers”
A lot of YAML
A lot of “shift left” security theatre
And a tragic absence of actual structural change
We told people they were on the DevOps council, but never granted them the rank of master.
They got the responsibility, not the authority.
The Post That Sparked the Thought Bubble
“The most in-demand GRC job title in the next three years doesn’t technically exist yet… GRC Engineers are not hypothetical unicorns.”
This LinkedIn post recently made the rounds, and to be fair, it hits some strong notes.
These so-called GRC Engineers are doing vital work:
Writing policy as code
Embedding enforcement into delivery pipelines
Measuring compliance with telemetry instead of spreadsheets
Acting like engineers, not auditors
But the more I thought about it, the more it gnawed at me:
You’re not describing a unicorn. You’re describing what DevOps was meant to evolve into, in most places that is quite telling.
GRC-as-Code Isn’t New, We Just Failed to Finish the Job
Let’s be clear: the tools and principles for GRC-as-code have existed for years.
Azure Policy and Defender for Cloud
Codify guardrails, flag drift, prove enforcement. These tools offer built-in compliance scorecards, regulatory mappings, and remediation workflows that can be embedded directly into CI/CD.
This isn’t a new revolution. It’s just one which was abandoned halfway through and then found hiding behind the couch cushions.
I’ve worked with teams who had Azure Policy wired into every pipeline, but still relied on manual checklists before go-live.
Too many organisations latched onto the “Dev” and “Ops” parts but never actually empowered teams to influence governance.
They bought the tools, drew some diagrams, hired the engineers and then left GRC in the hands of Word documents, PDF templates, and “security review” checklists that arrive three days before go-live.
GRC Engineers in DevSecOps: The Missing Link
DevSecOps promised to embed security into the delivery lifecycle, but governance often got left behind.
GRC-as-code is what completes the triangle:
Dev builds the features
Sec secures the code
GRC ensures it’s accountable, auditable, and aligned with business risk
For DevOps engineers, this means integrating policy engines, telemetry, and compliance checks directly into CI/CD workflows. It’s not just about “shifting left”, it’s about shifting up, into the realm of strategic decision-making.
DevOps Didn’t Fail, It Was Undermined
This isn’t about blaming the engineers.
Most DevOps professionals I’ve met have been asking for this level of influence for years:
“Can we codify our controls?”
“Can we automate the audit process?”
“Can we build for compliance, not bolt it on?”
But what did they get?
Tooling without context
Responsibility without input
Velocity targets with no time to implement quality controls
And above all: a seat at the table, but no vote.
DevOps was supposed to deliver empowered engineers. What we got was engineers with pagers and Jira access, but no say in risk modelling.
Or, to quote Terry Pratchett:
“The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.”
And in this case, “things” usually means last-minute compliance checklists. Don’t get me wrong the checklist has its place, but it should be part of this process and not an afterthought.
What DevOps Engineers Should Know About GRC
If you’re a DevOps engineer wondering where GRC fits into your world, here’s the reality:
You’re already doing half the job and you know that GRC is not just the realm of graduates and architects. Cybersecurity is a team sport after all.
Every time you write infrastructure as code, enforce a pipeline policy, or monitor drift, you’re touching GRC.
The next step is ownership.
GRC Engineers aren’t here to slow you down. They’re here to help you prove what you’ve built is secure, compliant, and resilient. And if your org is serious about DevSecOps, they’ll empower you to be part of that conversation, not just the implementation.
The Path Forward for DevOps Engineers
DevOps engineers aren’t missing the mark, they’re missing the mandate. The tools are in place. The intent is there. What’s needed now is a shift in structure and mindset:
Recognize GRC as engineering work – not just policy overhead.
Upskill in governance concepts to understand how code maps to risk.
Embed GRC into CI/CD workflows using policy engines and telemetry.
Push for structural change so DevOps teams have authority, not just responsibility.
Collaborate with GRC professionals to build trust and resilience.
Lead the cultural shift that proves governance can be agile.
This aligns with the principles of Microsoft’s Secure Future Initiative – where security and governance are built-in, not bolted on.
DevOps engineers are already halfway there. The next step is ownership.
What Integrated DevOps + GRC Engineers Looks Like
In a mature DevOps + GRC Engineers model, the lines between engineering and governance blur not because roles are confused, but because accountability is shared and codified.
Key characteristics of the end state:
Policy-as-code is standard: Guardrails are versioned, tested, and deployed like any other artifact.
CI/CD pipelines enforce governance: Every deployment includes automated checks for compliance, risk thresholds, and audit readiness.
Telemetry replaces manual evidence: Compliance is measured continuously, not retroactively.
DevOps engineers own governance outcomes: They’re empowered to design, implement, and evolve controls – not just follow them.
GRC professionals act as strategic partners: They help define risk models and regulatory mappings, but collaborate with engineers to operationalise them.
Security and governance are built-in: From architecture to deployment, every layer reflects resilience, accountability, and trust.
GRC tasks are treated as serious engineering work: They are just as important as product development and bug fixes.
This isn’t just alignment, it’s integration. And it’s the kind of model Microsoft’s Secure Future Initiative defines: where security and governance are foundational, not reactive.
Final Thoughts From the High Ground
If your DevOps team wasn’t allowed to evolve, then yes—you’re going to need GRC Engineers. But let’s call it what it really is:
“A patch for a cultural failure.” This isn’t a bold new frontier; it’s the remediation plan for promises unfulfilled.
DevOps was always supposed to include governance. Security was always supposed to be embedded. Policy was always supposed to be code.
Hire GRC Engineers if you need them. Build the pipelines. Version control the policies.
But more importantly: fix the structure that made this role “innovative” in the first place.
Because if you’re still doing compliance in Word docs while shipping infrastructure through Bicep pipelines, you’ve already lost the high ground.
What’s in it for me as a DevOps engineer or leader?
For engineers:
Gain authority, not just responsibility: own your governance outcomes, don’t just implement them.
Move from firefighting compliance issues with checklists to building automated, auditable pipelines for compliance. Track them like all your other configurations!
Become the bridge between speed and trust, making your role strategic, not reactive.
For leaders:
Reduce risk without slowing delivery by embedding GRC-as-code.
Empower your teams to implement compliance, prove it continuously and stop the scramble at go-live.
Align with frameworks like Microsoft Secure Future Initiative, start showing governance is built-in, not bolted on.
GRC should not be overhead, it’s your competitive edge. Start codifying your governance today!
