Civic Innovations

Technical debt is typically thought of as outdated code or neglected infrastructure, and is usually associated with custom software development. But vendor lock-in is one of the most under-appreciated forms of technical debt, and it isn’t reserved just to custom solutions. When agencies are too tightly coupled to a proprietary technology tool or offering, custom or COTS, they risk taking on future costs—costs that may not be obvious at first, but will accumulate over time.

Vendor lock-in limits flexibility. It means that as technology evolves, switching to a better, cheaper, or more secure option isn’t just a matter of choice—it’s a costly, complex migration effort. The longer an agency stays locked in, the harder and more expensive it becomes to leave.

Like any technical debt, vendor lock-in is often the result of short-term convenience. A platform that promises quick implementation or seamless integration can be appealing, but if it restricts future choices, that convenience comes at a price. Agencies may find themselves paying escalating licensing fees, struggling with interoperability, or stuck waiting for a vendor’s roadmap to align with their needs.

Avoiding this kind of debt requires intentional decisions upfront. Investing in open standards, modular architectures, and interoperability reduces the risk. It also means understanding how agency data is stored, and how it can be exported or extracted from vendor solutions. This kind of an approach better ensures that agencies remain in control of their technology choices, rather than being controlled by them.

The bill for technical debt always comes due. The question is whether government agencies will recognize vendor lock-in as part of it—and take steps now to keep their options open.