Introduction

On March 17, 2025, Amsterdam’s municipality announced its ambition to reduce reliance on large international tech companies, particularly American firms. The city aims to regain control over its data, prioritize digital independence, and explore alternatives to cloud services provided by Big Tech.

The vision is clear: greater autonomy, stronger data privacy, and a more resilient digital infrastructure. But in practice, how feasible is this shift? Can large organizations truly break free from major cloud providers like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon?

The reality is more complex. Many organizations—including Amsterdam itself—are deeply integrated into platforms like Microsoft 365 due to past decisions. For example, the municipality adopted Microsoft Teams during Microsoft’s free Covid promotion, which eventually led to a full Microsoft 365 platform dependency. Now, moving away from Microsoft’s ecosystem is no small task.

Can you escape big tech? – Watch on YouTube

This article is based on the conversation held by LicenseQ’s executive team – Floris, Erik and Lucas. Tune into their conversation by watching the video below.

A Growing Movement for Digital Sovereignty

The call for digital independence and sovereignty is gaining momentum, particularly within Europe. Geopolitical tensions, regulatory challenges, and a growing concern about the control US tech giants wield over critical infrastructure are pushing organizations to reconsider their dependence on these cloud providers.

For Amsterdam, this means exploring alternatives to Microsoft, Amazon, and Google, in a bid to reclaim control over sensitive data and digital operations. However, the complexity of this shift cannot be underestimated.

In previous discussions, we have highlighted how the pandemic-era rush into cloud adoption was often made by organizations without fully understanding the long-term implications. Organizations, both large and small, signed contracts and committed to cloud services. Many of these included the Microsoft 365 suite and, more recently, the highly hyped Microsoft Copilot (in all its flavors). But as time has passed, a shift in sentiment has occurred.

Then vs. Now: The Changing Landscape of Cloud Adoption

In the earlier days of the cloud adoption surge, many clients were eager to embrace Microsoft’s cloud services. The speed of digital transformation, spurred in part by the pandemic, meant that organizations often signed up for cloud services without fully grasping the costs or long-term consequences of making such key IT decisions. Deals were made quickly, and in some cases, before products like Microsoft Copilot were even launched, leading to large commitments and, in some instances, a reliance on a single vendor.

A shifting sentiment

However, the landscape has shifted. Today, many clients are rethinking their commitment to Microsoft, questioning whether their dependence on one cloud provider has left them vulnerable. This shift is largely driven by growing economic tensions in global trade, initially sparked by tariffs introduced during the Trump administration.

The sentiment is clear: organizations are increasingly wary of becoming overly reliant on a single vendor (lock-in). In particular, the growing geopolitical and regulatory uncertainties surrounding US tech giants have driven a sense of caution. With rising concerns over data privacy, security, and compliance, especially within Europe, organizations are beginning to reassess whether they should continue to place their trust in cloud services controlled by non-European providers.

Geopolitical Concerns and Repatriating IT Workloads

One of the key driving forces behind this shift is the increasing geopolitical concerns around data sovereignty. European organizations, including municipalities like Amsterdam, are particularly sensitive to these issues, as they look to reduce their reliance on US-based cloud providers. In response, there’s been a noticeable interest in repatriating IT workloads. For instance, moving from Microsoft Azure to local data centers or European hosting providers.

The question is how easy is this to accomplish? Especially for companies who have spent time, resources and effort to switch to innovative cloud computing platforms.

Cloud diversification

This trend reflects a broader movement toward cloud diversification, with organizations exploring alternatives that provide more control over their data. While cloud services are still seen as an important tool for innovation, clients are now more inclined to look beyond Microsoft and consider other providers or even local alternatives, depending on their needs. But how many high-quality cloud providers exist outside the US? And can traditional — or even local — hosting providers truly match the level of service, scale, and innovation that companies like Microsoft and Amazon have consistently delivered?

The Lock-In Problem: Why Large Organizations Struggle to Leave

1. Deeply Embedded Systems

Large organizations rely on Microsoft 365 for much more than just email and document editing; their entire IT infrastructure—identity management, collaboration tools, security policies, and automation workflows—depends on it.

Example: Amsterdam’s reliance on M365 means migrating emails, files, SharePoint data, Teams integrations, and security protocols would be a major challenge.

2. Contractual & Financial Barriers

Exiting enterprise agreements with Microsoft, AWS, or Google are difficult due to long-term commitments and early termination penalties.

Example: An M365 E5 Enterprise Agreement requires a 3-year commitment, with potential penalties for early termination or unused licenses.

3. User Adoption & Training Costs

Shifting to open-source or European alternatives involves training thousands of employees, redesigning workflows, and managing resistance to change.

Example: The Dutch government’s previous attempt to transition to open-source software failed due to adoption challenges, forcing them to return to Microsoft.

4. Data Storage & Compliance Complexities

Storing data within the EU is a priority, but many European alternatives still rely on American infrastructure, complicating compliance.

Example: OVHcloud, a European provider, still uses AWS for certain services.

Cloud Isn’t the Issue—Dependency Is

The problem isn’t necessarily with the cloud itself; cloud services still hold great promise for driving innovation and digital transformation. The issue lies in over-dependence on a single vendor. While companies like Microsoft and Amazon have implemented many safeguards, the question remains: what happens if these protections are changed or removed in the future? After all, much of the current assurance rests on policy language — and our trust that these companies will continue to honor those commitments.

Avoid a “Microsoft-only” strategy

Organizations should avoid adopting a “Microsoft-only” strategy, as this could limit their flexibility and bargaining power. By diversifying cloud providers, organizations can create competitive scenarios that will enable them to better negotiate pricing and terms in the future.

Some examples highlight the growing trend toward vendor diversification. For instance, Amsterdam’s municipality recently paused its Copilot purchases to assess market alternatives, underscoring the growing interest in considering different cloud providers. Similarly, a Dutch construction company chose AWS over Microsoft Azure after a competitive bidding process, citing the cost vs. sovereignty trade-offs involved in the decision.

Strategic Recommendations for Large Organizations

So, how can large organizations navigate this complex landscape of cloud adoption and digital sovereignty?

1. Don’t Default to Microsoft “Unless”

The most important takeaway for any organization is to avoid defaulting to Microsoft simply because it’s the most convenient or familiar option. Each new project, whether it’s a CRM, ERP, AI or other enterprise systems, should be an opportunity to evaluate vendor independence. Large organizations should be cautious about locking themselves into long-term commitments with one provider.

2. Embrace Vendor Diversification

Avoid putting all your eggs in one basket. Exploring multiple cloud solutions and engaging in competitive bidding processes not only improves negotiation leverage but also ensures that your organization isn’t overly dependent on one vendor. This can provide flexibility should a particular solution no longer serve your needs.

3. Be Cautious with Long-Term Commitments

Given the rapid pace of technological change, especially with innovations like AI, organizations should reconsider locking themselves into long-term contracts. Shorter contract renewals, such as one-year terms, allow organizations to reassess their needs and avoid being caught in a cycle of expensive, long-term agreements with uncertain outcomes. It’s telling that today, it’s Microsoft pushing for longer-term contracts, while clients are increasingly asking for short-term flexibility — a complete reversal from just a few years ago.

4. Consider Repatriating IT Workloads

For organizations considering repatriating IT from Microsoft Azure or other cloud platforms, it’s essential to evaluate whether a return to on-premises solutions offers better control, cost-efficiency, or sovereignty. While cloud solutions have many advantages, rising costs and decreasing discounts are prompting many clients to explore third-party or CSP alternatives. Evaluating the financial and operational impact of repatriation should be a key part of any strategy.

5. Focus on Cloud Optimization

As cloud costs rise, organizations must ensure they are optimizing their environments. If cloud bills are climbing, it’s important to investigate why. A strategic approach to optimization—such as reviewing usage patterns, rightsizing services, and trimming unnecessary resources—can help reduce expenses and improve the cost-effectiveness of cloud solutions. Interested in optimization? Check out our LicenseQ Hub – LicenseQ Hub is our intelligent licensing tool that provides actionable insights to optimize Microsoft Azure, Microsoft 365, and Dynamics 365 environments for cost efficiency and compliance.

Exploring Alternatives: What Are the Options?

 1. Cloud & Data Storage Alternatives

If you want to store data outside of AWS, Azure, or Google Cloud, these are some potential alternatives:

You could also consider hybrid cloud models, storing sensitive data on local servers while still leveraging the scalability of public cloud providers for non-critical workloads.

2. Open-Source Productivity Software Alternatives

Moving away from Microsoft 365 means replacing Teams, Outlook, SharePoint, and Office apps. Here are some potential alternatives:

The challenge? While these alternatives exist, they don’t offer the same level of enterprise support, integration, and automation that Microsoft provides.