A New Executive Assistant's First 30-Day Access Review

new executive assistant access review in the first 30 days

New executive assistants often receive access in a rush. One predecessor's permissions are copied, a shared password appears in a handoff note, and extra folders are opened because the future role is still unclear. A first-month review replaces those assumptions with evidence from the work the assistant actually performs.

Map duties before copying access

List recurring actions such as scheduling, travel, expenses, board preparation, contact management, and meeting support. For each action, name the system, information needed, approval boundary, and accountable owner. This makes it possible to grant a useful role without cloning every permission held by a predecessor whose responsibilities may have been different.

Fix workarounds during onboarding

Shared credentials, forwarded one-time codes, personal cloud folders, and informal mailbox rules are warning signs. They usually mean the assistant lacks a proper route or the team has not documented authority. Move access into named accounts and approved delegation features. If the correct tool is unavailable, record the risk and owner rather than normalizing the shortcut.

Review what the assistant actually used

After several weeks, compare granted permissions with real tasks. Remove access that has no current purpose, and investigate repeated requests that the role should handle but cannot. Ask the assistant where they rely on another person's session or copied data. The review should improve both security and the speed of ordinary work.

Set triggers for the next review

Thirty days is a checkpoint, not a permanent certification. Schedule another review when the supported executive, board role, employment status, office location, or system changes. Put removal duties beside grant duties so temporary projects end cleanly. Every permission should have a business owner who can still explain it later.

Turn the first month into an access decision

Bring a list of actual tasks to the review, including the work the assistant could not complete without borrowing access. For each permission, decide whether to keep, narrow, remove, or replace it with a delegated feature. Record the system owner and business reason. The conversation should produce decisions, not a general statement that onboarding went well.

Give workaround removal a deadline. A shared login may survive because it feels temporary even after proper access exists. Ask the assistant to demonstrate the normal path for the most sensitive recurring tasks and confirm that another person's session is no longer part of it. Schedule the next review around a real role change rather than an arbitrary annual reminder alone.

Access questions for the first-month meeting

Should a new assistant see the full inbox?

Only when documented duties require it and the executive approves the delegation scope.

Can access grow before the review?

Yes, through the normal approved request path with a named business purpose and owner.

Who attends the review?

Include the assistant, role manager or executive, and the relevant system or security owners.

Least privilege translated into onboarding

NIST defines least privilege as limiting access to the minimum necessary for assigned tasks. The 30-day review turns that principle into a practical onboarding conversation. Companies defining a new support role can review our C-suite EA service. The executive assistant hiring guide helps map duties before access is granted, and contacting our team can clarify how a placement handles delegation and permissions. Source: NIST glossary definition of least privilege.