Digital sovereignty is realised when organisations can make informed decisions about their data and systems, and implement them. This involves keeping essential services operational, adapting systems to evolving requirements, and switching providers when necessary.

But whose choices count? Management, engineering teams, and users may have different priorities. A decision that simplifies procurement today may restrict the options available to those maintaining or relying on the system tomorrow.

Drawing on our experiences and conversations with clients, we explore how to preserve meaningful choice within the constraints of existing systems, investments, skills, and commercial relationships. Which dependencies can we manage, and which could prevent us from acting when necessary? When does replacing a vendor improve our position, and when does it simply shift the dependency elsewhere?

We examine how open source, open standards and portability can support this goal, as well as the necessary skills, resources and clear responsibilities to transform potential alternatives into viable options. We also consider who should bear the cost of keeping those options open and how much independence is worth pursuing.

Participants will leave with a practical set of questions for identifying critical dependencies, assessing the viability of alternatives, and testing whether a plan B can be implemented. These questions help to connect technical decisions with organisational priorities and make explicit the choices that a system preserves, the cost of these choices and how long they are preserved for.

In the talk, we could use this as the main thread:

Whose choice? Who gains freedom to act, who is constrained, and who has to live with the consequences?
Which dependency? Which specific dependency affects our ability to act?
Can we act? Can we actually implement an alternative with the people and resources available to us, within a reasonable timeframe? What do we need to do today to keep the choices?