Why happy clients still scan the market for digital platforms

New data from the BCG 2025 study reveal a fascinating
paradox in how clients approach digital platform procurement: they are highly satisfied with their current providers yet actively search for
alternatives. This strategic caution, which is driven by a focus on risk
mitigation and future-proofing, suggests that platform contracting is
increasingly seen as a transactional, not relational, decision.

Cautious Strategies by Client Firms: Multi-Platform, Customization, and Data Control

Our study suggests that client firms have a strong preference
for multi-platform strategies, with 64% of clients adopting this
approach. This preference signifies a deliberate effort to mitigate risk
and avoid over-reliance on a single platform, reflecting a
"best-of-breed" perspective on the platform landscape.

Clients are also heavily invest in maintaining their own control and flexibility by following one or more of these strategies:

• Pursuing High Customization: A significant 72% of clients heavily customize their solutions based on business requirements. While this increases stickiness, it is primarily a tool to tailor the platform to unique business needs.
• Maintaining Data Ownership: A large majority (77%) retain their company's own data model instead of using the platform's out-of-the-box model. This action is a strategic lever to preserve switching options and manage the risk of data portability issues.
• Retaining In-House Governance: An overwhelming 82% prefer to govern platform provider relationships in-house. This strong emphasis on internal vendor management and contract oversight highlights a desire to maintain control and validate outcomes.

The Paradox: Satisfaction Meets Active Searching

The data also show a high degree of satisfaction, with over 80% of clients agreeing that the service value clearly justifies the fees. However, nearly 70% of clients actively scan the market for alternatives and engage with new entrants. So why happy clients are actively looking for alternatives?
Based on interviews we conducted with both clients and platform owners, this active exploration is not driven by current dissatisfaction, but rather can be attributed to one or more of the following reasons:

• A wariness of vendor lock-in: Clients are concerned about the high operational costs of switching, particularly technical
  migration (75% concern) and productivity loss (64% concern). Scanning the market is a proactive, low-cost defensive measure to remain educated on alternatives and maintain leverage over current providers, preventing them from becoming indispensable.
• A search for unmet needs or services not optimally hosted on a single platform: The strong preference for a multi-platform strategy (64%) indicates a belief in a "best-of-breed" ecosystem. Clients are searching for specialized capabilities or services that may not be offered or optimized by their current hyper-scaler or single-suite provider, thus leveraging multiple platforms to meet all complex business requirements.
• A desire for strategic optionality and future-proofing their business. Given the rapid pace of digital change, clients view platform scanning as a necessary strategic capability. They want to ensure they always have a viable Plan B and are ready to adopt emerging technologies (like GenAI) or pivot rapidly if their current provider falls behind or fails to innovate. They seek to maintain control over their future digital strategy.

The Barrier: High Perceived Switching Costs

Despite market scanning, clients are not actively looking to switch, which may be due to high perceived switching costs. The most significant concerns are technical and operational:

• Technical migration costs: Cited as a concern by 75% of respondents.
• Productivity loss: A concern for 64% of respondents.
• Transition downtime costs: A concern for 63% of respondents.
  

These concerns are amplified by the expected technical challenges associated with switching, with a high proportion of clients anticipating API integration
issues (65%) and data issues like portability and proprietary formats
(61%). Notably, the impact on relationships with the previous provider is
the least of their concerns (27%), amplifying the transactional nature of
platform contracting.

So what is the Value Proposition in Platform Ecosystems?

While Cost efficiency is the most important factor in platform selection (33%), followed by Security & Compliance (18%), the true value in our study is operational gains. Only 44% report significant cost reductions, yet satisfaction remains high because of substantial improvements have been realised in:

• Operations efficiency (85%).
• Corporate data management (83%).
• Standardization of processes (83%).
  

In conclusion, clients are highly satisfied with the operational and value improvements from their digital platforms, but they employ multi-platform, customization, and data ownership strategies to maintain control and optionality. Their caution is less about current dissatisfaction and more about managing perceived high switching costs and preparing for future needs in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.

To navigate through this complex platform ecosystems’ landscape, read our article: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2025/managing-dynamics-digital-platform-lock-in