一项针对美英大型企业 2,018 名高级 IT 决策者的调查显示，企业平均将 28% 的软件预算花在并不想要的升级、迁移和许可变更上。尽管认为这些由供应商推动的变更可能降低性能、可靠性或业务价值，95% 的受访者仍表示其组织在过去三年中接受过此类变更，主要原因是缺少可行替代方案和谈判筹码。
证据包尚未生成
Enterprises keep buying software upgrades that IT thinks will make things worse - Ars Technica Skip to content Ars Technica home Sections Forum Subscribe Search AI Biz & IT Cars Culture Gaming Health Policy Science Security Space Tech Feature Reviews AI Biz & IT Cars Culture Gaming Health Policy Science Security Space Tech Forum Subscribe Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only Learn more Pin to story Theme HyperLight Day & Night Dark System Search Sign In Sign in dialog...
Sign in software struggles Enterprises keep buying software upgrades that IT thinks will make things worse Survey of 2,018 IT heads at big firms points to a lack of leverage. Scharon Harding – Oct 21, 2026 5:48 pm | 12 Credit: Clara Molden/PA Images via Getty Images Credit: Clara Molden/PA Images via Getty Images Text settings Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only Learn more Minimize to nav Enterprise-sized businesses spend, on average, 28 percent of their software budgets on unwanted upgrades, migrations, and licensing changes.
Often, those firms’ IT heads think those changes are detrimental. Those results are according to a survey of 2,018 chief information officers and senior IT decision-makers at companies with at least 10,000 employees that Origina commissioned for its report, “ The Software Tax .” About half of the respondents (1,011) are from the US, and the rest are from the United Kingdom. All respondents worked at companies with at least $1 billion in annual revenue. Keep in mind that Origina provides maintenance for various enterprise software.
Its report points to independent software maintenance as a way for IT leaders to regain control over software budgets, illustrating its potential bias. A third-party research consultancy, Censuswide , conducted the survey. Among the report’s most concerning findings, enterprises often make software purchases that IT heads believe could hurt the organization.
Ninety-five percent of respondents said “their organization has paid for a vendor-driven upgrade, migration, or licensing change in the past three years that it believed at the time would reduce performance, reliability, or business value,” the report says. Fifty-three percent of respondents “have done so more than once,” the report notes.
“Some 76 percent say their organization has very little real leverage in negotiations, and 80 percent say moving away from major vendors would cause significant disruption,” the report says, referring to the share of respondents who selected “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree” to those statements. “When the alternative to an unwanted upgrade is losing support on systems the business runs on, saying yes is often a rational response,” Tomás O’Leary, one of the report’s authors and Origina’s CEO and founder, said in a statement. “That’s exactly the problem.
The market has left some of the most experienced technology leaders in the world with little room to refuse, and that cost shows up in budgets, in engineering time, and in innovation that never gets funded.” The result is less funding for other areas, particularly, per the report, innovation (named by 36 percent of respondents), human resources (32 percent), security (31 percent), and “customer-facing investment” (31 percent).
In a statement accompanying the survey’s announcement, Liberty Mutual’s CIO, James McGlennon, pointed out that an upgrade cycle could occupy top technical workers for “the better part of a year.” “That’s not a one-off cost, it’s a recurring drag on capacity, and every year it repeats is a year those people aren’t working on the initiatives that actually differentiate the business,” he said.
The majority (91 percent) surveyed would support laws that give enterprises “protections comparable with those available to long-term residential tenants.” Only 1 percent opposed this (with the rest signaling that they neither support nor oppose the idea). CIOs should “negotiate the exit before the entry” to have more control over software budgets, Marshall Van Alstyne, the report’s co-author and an information sciences professor at Boston University, said in a statement.
Origina’s report suggests “settling the terms of a potential exit,” including setting a price for migration assistance and caps on renewal and expansion prices, during initial negotiations with the software vendor. Origina’s report didn’t call out any specific vendors as forcing enterprises’ hands.
However, every survey respondent currently runs “at least one of IBM, HCL, VMware/Broadcom, or SAP at meaningful scale.” Scharon Harding Senior Technology Reporter Scharon Harding Senior Technology Reporter Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She's been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK. 12 Comments Comments Forum view Loading comments... Prev story Next story Most Read 1.
The Internet goes on high alert after discovery of 8 compromised TLS certs 2. PHP warns it plans to release 2 emergency patches imminently 3. Cops raid office of RFK Jr. allies planning “unethical” vaccine trial on babies 4.
Microsoft reportedly projects $1,200 to $1,800 price for 2028 Project Helix 5. Visiting Slate’s first showroom as its $25,000 electric truck nears production Customize Ars Technica has been separating the signal from the noise for over 25 years. With our unique combination of technical savvy and wide-ranging interest in the technological arts and sciences, Ars is the trusted source in a sea of information. After all, you don’t need to know everything, only what’s important.
More from Ars About Us Staff Directory Newsletters General FAQ Posting Guidelines AI Policy RSS Feeds Contact Contact us Advertise with us Reprints Manage Preferences © 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement and Ars Technica Addendum and Your California Privacy Rights . Ars Technica may earn compensation on sales from links on this site.
Read our affiliate link policy . The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices