Most startups don’t start with security in mind.
They start with a deal on the line.
A customer asks about SOC 2.
The team reacts.
Compliance becomes the priority.
That’s where things quietly go off track.
Because compliance and security are related — but they’re not the same thing.
And when you treat them as one, the gap doesn’t show immediately.
It shows later, when someone looks closer.
Compliance Usually Starts With a Customer Ask
In early-stage companies, security rarely comes from first principles.
It’s usually triggered by demand.
A buyer asks a question.
That question shapes what gets built.
So instead of designing systems around real risk, teams start aligning with a framework.
It works for getting through the door.
But it often lacks depth.
You Don’t “Finish” Compliance
A common assumption is that compliance is a milestone.
Get certified → move on.
That’s not how it plays out in practice.
Compliance keeps running in the background.
It depends on:
people following processes
systems generating evidence
teams staying consistent over time
You can bring in tools or auditors.
But the responsibility doesn’t leave your team.
Where Most Teams Struggle
The issue isn’t lack of tools.
It’s lack of internal alignment.
Good compliance setups separate responsibilities:
someone implements controls
someone else reviews them
Without that split, things look fine on paper
but don’t hold up under scrutiny
And that’s where audits start getting uncomfortable
What Changes as Companies Grow
The approach to compliance shifts over time.
Early stage:
figuring out what matters
moving fast to meet requirements
leaning on external help
Later stage:
tightening controls
building internal ownership
focusing on consistency
The shift is simple:
from getting compliant
to operating in a compliant way
Underrated Problem Areas
There are still parts of compliance that aren’t well solved:
tracking what existed at a specific point in time
monitoring controls continuously
aligning different teams on risk
staying audit-ready without scrambling
These problems show up often
but don’t always get direct attention
What SOC 2 Really Communicates
SOC 2 isn’t just a checkbox.
It tells customers:
you’ve defined how you handle data
you have controls in place
you can show proof when needed
But it also creates an expectation:
that things improve over time
Staying static doesn’t build confidence
progress does
A Better Way to Approach It
Instead of treating compliance like a task list:
start with actual risks
assign clear ownership
build systems that capture evidence naturally
keep implementation and review separate
think beyond certification
This changes how your company is evaluated
especially in serious deals
Closing Thought
Compliance might open the conversation
but it’s not what carries it forward
What matters is whether your approach holds up
when different teams start looking at risk in their own way
CTA
If you’re working through SOC 2 or selling into enterprise,
follow along for more breakdowns on how compliance actually plays out inside real deals
