Data Management


data is stored, and also the freedom to decide for themselves how it is used, with whom it is shared, and how it is further developed. Technically, this is best implemented using approaches based on


open standards and portable components – so that companies can operate their infrastructure in the environment that suits them best: on- premises, in the cloud, or in a hybrid setup. For service providers, this portability also creates commercial flexibility, allowing them to support customers across hyperscalers, on-premises and sovereign cloud environments without introducing another form of vendor lock-in. What matters here is not the label, but the question: Who ultimately has control – the company or the provider?


What role do external providers play in digital sovereignty? We see ourselves – and the broader partner ecosystem – as enablers. We provide the technological foundation that enables companies to own their data platforms without having to build everything from scratch. In addition to the soſtware, we also provide expertise for building and operating data platforms. Te goal is to empower companies to manage their own data


platforms and infrastructure – while we provide support, security updates, and new features. And we enable this autonomy through open-source components. Tat is the major advantage of open source: the source code is always accessible, and tools curated by the international open-source community are used. Tis creates true independence.


So, is open source the key to digital sovereignty? Open source isn’t a panacea, but it does reduce dependency. Proprietary tools tie organisations to vendors, hide source code and restrict switching. Open source offers transparency, customisation and easier provider choice. However, true autonomy only arises when companies can actually


exercise this freedom. Tis requires in-house expertise, clear operating models, and defined responsibilities. Many organisations therefore combine open-source technologies with commercial services, such as for support or security. Te key is that control over systems and data remains in-house and not with the vendor. Tis is also where experienced service providers create value: they help customers operate open-source platforms while ensuring that ownership of the infrastructure remains with the customer.


Is switching from proprietary soſtware to open source complex, or does it automatically entail more responsibility? Actually, quite the opposite: even proprietary soſtware that I purchase and operate myself must be something that I, as a company, can operate and master. With open source, this is even easier, precisely because I can read the source code if I don’t understand something. Te key difference is that the level of vertical integration oſten


needs to be higher with open source, since you can’t get everything ‘managed’ or ‘as a service’, and many companies are no longer accustomed to operating their own systems. Tat’s why many organisations rely on specialist partners to bridge this gap while keeping their infrastructure open and portable. But in the long run, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages: greater transparency, less dependence on individual providers,


www.pcr-online.biz


and significantly more flexibility in further developing one’s own infrastructure. Thanks to automation and standardised modules, complexity can be managed today. Our customers really appreciate that.


Does digital sovereignty have to be expensive? No, not at all. While costs may arise in the short term – for example, for migration or training – they decrease in the long run because proprietary licensing models are eliminated, and companies are no longer at the mercy of manufacturers’ pricing. Anyone who keeps an eye on the total cost of ownership, the TCO, will realise that sovereignty makes perfect economic sense. When it comes to data platforms, it also makes sense to choose


a transparent provider. The same transparency also benefits solution providers, who can build predictable, long-term service offerings rather than relying solely on proprietary licensing models. Are there any hidden costs related to data volume, the number of users, or general scalability? If you take these points into account, you’re on the safe side.


The debate around digital sovereignty is gaining momentum in the UK, with organisations such as techUK calling for greater resilience, interoperability and customer choice. What would you like UK businesses and channel partners to take away from this discussion? I think the most important message is that digital sovereignty should not be seen as an ideological debate or an all-or-nothing decision. For UK organisations, it is about building resilience, preserving freedom of choice and avoiding unnecessary dependencies that could limit future development or commercial flexibility. This is also where the channel plays a crucial role. MSPs, resellers and systems integrators are in a position


to help customers modernise their infrastructure without forcing disruptive migrations. They can combine open-source technologies with managed services and guide organisations through practical, low-risk transformation projects. For many MSPs, this also represents an opportunity to move further up the value chain. Instead of focusing primarily on infrastructure operations, they can expand into managed data platforms, AI and analytics services while continuing to build long-term customer relationships. I also welcome the fact that organisations such as techUK are


encouraging discussions around interoperability, open standards and customer choice. These are exactly the principles that enable digital sovereignty in practice. The important thing is not to replace one dependency with another, but to create an IT environment that remains adaptable as business, regulatory or geopolitical requirements evolve. That commercial flexibility benefits both customers and their


service providers, who remain free to choose the infrastructure that best fits each individual use case. In the end, digital sovereignty is built step by step. The first successful project often changes the conversation entirely, because it demonstrates that greater independence is achievable without sacrificing reliability or innovation. That benefits customers and also creates significant long-term opportunities for the UK channel.


September/October 2026 | 35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52