“Lock-in only becomes visible when you try to leave”

It is about entrepreneurial freedom of action. Specifically, it refers to the ability to consciously choose, control, and, if necessary, switch technologies. Today, in many tenders, it is no longer just functionality that matters, but also the question of who controls the data and under which legal jurisdiction it falls. Those who cannot meet these requirements often do not even make the shortlist.

As an Independent Software Vendor (ISV), it is both a management responsibility and a corporate obligation for us. It influences growth prospects, risk profiles, and market access. The key question is shifting from “How do we operate IT?” to “Under what conditions can we even conduct business?” Customers are increasingly demanding proof in this regard. Especially in regulated industries, it is becoming a decisive selection criterion. Companies that cannot transparently present data flows, access rights, and technological dependencies lose concrete projects. As a result, the topic is moving into the responsibility of executive leadership.

At the exact moment when they want to change something, and realize they cannot. The provider changes the rules: prices increase, licensing models shift, and negotiations become nearly impossible. Or deals fail because data storage and jurisdiction are not acceptable to customers or regulators. Lock-in only becomes visible when you try to leave.

The fastest innovation often occurs where technological dependencies are strongest. Cloud models enable speed and scalability through standardization and the use of external platforms. Strategic control, however, requires transparency and the ability to switch. This creates a tension between short-term agility and long-term flexibility.

Structural factors and incentive systems are decisive. Many applications are deeply embedded in the ecosystems of major providers. Decoupling them later results in high transition costs, technical legacy issues, and operational risks. At the same time, sovereign alternatives are often less standardized, which contradicts our scaling model as a software provider and slows sales and implementation.

Because it primarily focuses on protecting systems. Digital sovereignty, by contrast, focuses on entrepreneurial decision-making capability. While IT security asks whether systems are protected against attacks or failures, digital sovereignty concerns influence over technology use, data access, and structural dependencies. A system can be technically stable and secure yet still be dependent in a way that is neither transparent nor reversible – for example, with proprietary cloud services. IT security is operational in nature; digital sovereignty is holistic, as it affects business models, risk, and market access.

With our solutions, customers decide for themselves on the operating environment. They can deploy them on-prem, in a private cloud, or with established hyperscalers. A unified codebase and identical functionality across all models ensure this flexibility. This preserves the ability to switch infrastructure when needed.

Public discussions often focus on where data is stored. In reality, what matters is who can access it and under what conditions. Access means power over data – whether for use, analysis, or sharing. This is where value creation is determined.

Digital sovereignty has evolved from an abstract compliance topic into a clear procurement requirement. Especially in the public sector and regulated industries, customers now demand data processing within the EU, transparency regarding technologies used, and verifiable compliance rather than mere self-declaration. Beta Systems has responded accordingly in both product development and sales. In some projects, digital sovereignty is already a decisive factor in winning contracts.

What is needed are practical and marketable framework conditions. Digital sovereignty must become scalable – both nationally and internationally. This requires clear criteria, for example, regarding access protection, legal jurisdiction, and switching options. Standardized European certifications could provide investment security, provided they remain internationally compatible. Public sector clients and regulated industries should integrate such requirements into their procurement processes. At the same time, governments and large regulated industries must act as anchor customers. Only then can a sustainable market emerge.

For us, digital sovereignty is not a new buzzword but a product reality we have delivered for decades: software “Made in Europe,” without backdoors or kill switches, with clear access models, high auditability, and no hidden dependencies. What matters most is that customers remain able to act and retain genuine freedom of choice. The fact that we are now actively marketing this shows that sovereignty is no longer just an IT feature – it is a real growth driver in regulated markets.