You want to change, but you can't

The Scene That Eventually Comes

The first year was great. The new SaaS provider offered quick implementation, good features, friendly support. You sign a three-year contract. Everything runs smoothly.

Then, after a year and a half, the inevitable happens.

The provider increases prices by 40%. A feature you need is discontinued. A competing product suddenly looks much better.

You want to switch. And then you realize:

Your data is in a proprietary format. Your workflows are deeply integrated. Your team knows only this system. Switching would take months and cost hundreds of thousands of francs.

This is Vendor Lock-in. Not theory - reality.

(We see this regularly. More often than you think.)

The Three Types of Lock-in

Technical Lock-in

The most obvious. Your data is stuck in a proprietary format. Your integrations are so deeply embedded in the platform that a move means: rewriting everything.

AWS Auto-Scaling? Not transferable to Azure. Salesforce data? Complex export. Marketo workflows? Months of migration effort.

Contractual Lock-in

Often overlooked, because it appears less technical. But just as effective.

Long notice periods. High penalties for early exit. Automatic renewals. And then the hidden clauses: Data retrieval fees that explode when you want to export your data.

Knowledge Lock-in

The most underestimated form.

Your team has invested thousands of hours in this platform. They know every hidden feature. Have written custom scripts. Know how to optimize the system.

Switching means: months of new training. Loss of institutional knowledge. Drop in productivity. Possibly even losing people who refuse to relearn everything.

Why Lock-in Is So Expensive

The direct costs are the obvious ones: higher prices, because you can't negotiate. Exit costs when you try. Productivity losses during migration.

The indirect costs are worse.

You can't negotiate with other providers - because you can't switch anyway. The provider knows this. Your negotiating position? Zero.

Your architecture is defined by the limits of a platform. You can't react quickly. Better tools come to the market - but you're tied.

A client of ours paid 15% more annually for their CRM for 8 years. Not because the CRM got better - but because the switch would have been too expensive. Estimated migration costs: 500,000 francs. So they stayed. And paid.

(By the way, this is not an isolated case. This is the norm.)

How to Avoid Lock-in

In the Contract

The first thing you should change: the contract terms.

Notice periods: Maximum 30-60 days. Anything longer is too much.

Data export clauses: Explicitly state that you can export your data free and in a standard format.

No data retrieval fees: The provider will try to include this. Fight back.

Exit assistance: The provider should help with migration - not sabotage it.

Negotiation tip: The first draft of the contract is never the best. Providers would rather keep a client with better terms than lose one.

In the Technology

Your data should never be in a format that only one provider can read.

Use standard formats. SQL, JSON, CSV - not proprietary database engines.

API-first approach. If your provider has a good API, use it. Makes exports trivial.

Regular backup tests. Don't hope you can export - test. Every 6 months. If it doesn't work, you know it early.

Use containers. Docker makes your applications portable. From AWS to Azure to On-Premise - doesn't matter.

Infrastructure-as-code. Terraform instead of cloud console. Makes switching easier.

In the Team

Document critical processes. Not just "in the head of an expert".

At least two people should know everything critical. Bus factor greater than 1.

If possible: Train generic concepts. SQL, REST APIs, Terraform - not tool-specific knowledge.

When Lock-in Is Okay

Let me be honest: Some lock-in is not only acceptable - it is strategically sensible.

AWS RDS for example. You have technical lock-in. But the features (Multi-AZ, Read-Replicas, Automated Backups) give you value you couldn't build yourself. PostgreSQL underneath is portable. That's a conscious trade-off.

The difference:

Strategic Lock-in - entered intentionally, measured, consciously.

Accidental Lock-in - happens out of ignorance, no alternative evaluated.

Self-inflicted Lock-in - "We simply never planned."

The first is okay. The second and third are not.

The Most Common Mistake

Vendor lock-in is not static. It worsens over time if you don't actively counter it.

The most common mistake: Choose a provider once and then forget.

Costs creep up. Contracts auto-renew. The team becomes more dependent. And eventually, you realize: You're trapped.

The solution? Annual reviews.

Are we still paying reasonable prices? What are the best alternatives now? What would the switch cost? Do we still need this provider?

These reviews should not lead to the same outcome every year. Sometimes the answer is "we stay." Sometimes it is "we start planning."

What You Can Do

1. List Your Top 5 Providers - the critical ones. Cloud, CRM, ERP, whatever.

2. Ask Yourself for Each: Could I be gone in 90 days? If not - why not?

3. Check the Contracts - Notice periods, exit clauses, data export regulations.

4. Test a Data Export - Can you actually get your data out? In what format?

5. Calculate the Exit Costs - What would a switch realistically cost? You should know this number.

The Point

Lock-in is not a law of nature. It is a strategic problem with strategic solutions.

The best time for prevention was at contract signing. The second best is today.

Companies that manage their provider dependencies are not paranoid. They simply plan. They negotiate better. They test their exits before they need them.

The result? More negotiating power. Greater flexibility. And yes - less money for the same services.

This is not paranoia. This is strategic vendor management.

Want to know how dependent you really are? We conduct lock-in audits for Swiss companies - pragmatic and without fear-mongering. Talk to us.