Primary source: Origina press release and methodology

Large companies in the U.S. and U.K. spend an average of 28% of their software budgets on upgrades, migrations and licensing changes they would not have chosen, according to a survey of 2,018 senior IT decision-makers commissioned by Origina and released Tuesday, Oct. 20^1,2,3,4.

Origina sells independent maintenance for enterprise software as an alternative to vendors' own support, so it has a commercial interest in the findings, as Ars Technica and The Register both noted^1,4. The research firm Censuswide ran the survey, and the report was published with Thinkers50^1,2,4.

Ninety-five percent of respondents said their organization had paid in the past three years for a vendor-driven change it expected would reduce performance, reliability or business value, and 53% said that had happened more than once^1,2,4. The most recent such change cost respondents' organizations an average of $12.87 million, according to Origina^2,3,4.

Seventy-six percent said they had very little leverage in negotiations with major vendors, 80% said moving away from one would cause significant disruption, and 78% said their main vendor, not their own organization, sets the timing and terms of change^1,2,3.

Respondents also reported knock-on costs: 84% said senior engineers often or always spend time on vendor-driven upgrades, and 91% said they had retired working hardware to meet a vendor's support deadline, losing about 1.65 years of useful life on average^2,4. Asked about the last AI or data program that was slowed, paused or canceled, 34% said vendor-driven costs were a major factor and 56% a moderate one^2,3,4.

Innovation was the budget most often named as squeezed, by 36% of respondents, followed by human resources at 32% and security at 31%, Ars Technica reported¹.

Ninety-one percent said they would support laws giving enterprise software customers protections comparable to those of long-term residential tenants, and 82% backed software-support rules similar to EU hardware repairability requirements^1,2,4.

"When the alternative to an unwanted upgrade is losing support on systems the business runs on, saying yes is often a rational response," Origina CEO Tomás O'Leary said in a statement^1,2,3,4. Report co-author Marshall Van Alstyne, a Boston University professor, advised CIOs to "negotiate the exit before the entry"^1,2,3.

The report does not name vendors, but every respondent runs at least one of IBM, HCL, VMware/Broadcom or SAP at meaningful scale^1,2. Origina's methodology says respondents came from organizations with at least $1 billion in revenue or at least 10,000 employees, split between 1,011 in the U.S. and 1,007 in the U.K., with fieldwork on May 11-19, 2026². Ars Technica described the sample as companies meeting both thresholds¹.

Ars Technica identified James McGlennon, who described upgrade cycles tying up top engineers, as Liberty Mutual's CIO; Origina's release calls him a former Liberty Mutual CIO and a member of Origina's board^1,2. None of the four sources included a response from IBM, HCL, Broadcom or SAP^1,2,3,4.

Sources

1. Ars TechnicaSurvey: Enterprises waste 28 percent of software budgets on unwanted upgradesOct 21, 5:50 PM
2. Origina (press release)Large enterprises report spending more than a quarter of their software budgets on changes they would not have chosenOct 19, 8:00 PM
3. Computer WeeklyCIOs admit they are being forced to upgrade enterprise ITOct 20, 12:00 AM
4. The RegisterEnterprises blow nearly a third of software budgets on upgrades they never asked forOct 20, 11:43 AM

Read the original at Ars Technica ↗