Digital sovereignty starts with the choices you make

Digital sovereignty has become a serious topic in Europe. Organisations are thinking more carefully about where their data is stored, who controls their technology and how dependent they have become on a small number of international providers.

But there is a difference between talking about digital sovereignty and actually becoming more digitally sovereign.

Because sovereignty isn't something you achieve with one decision. It is the result of many technology choices you make: the cloud provider you use, the software behind your website, your CRM, analytics and collaboration tools, and the platforms that process your customer data.

At Tilaa, that made us look critically at our own choices too.

We've been providing European cloud infrastructure since 2008. Keeping data in Europe, protecting privacy and avoiding unnecessary vendor lock-in have always been important parts of how we operate.

That same approach also applied to the tools we used ourselves.

For years, HubSpot was our platform for our website, CRM and email marketing. While using HubSpot, we had already taken measures to protect data and keep our setup as European as possible. We used European hosting options where available, limited and anonymised the data we processed and designed our processes with privacy and data protection in mind.

But still we asked ourselves whether we could take the next step.

Because even when you configure a platform carefully, the platform itself can still be a dependency. You remain connected to the vendor, its technology, its pricing model and ultimately the jurisdiction it operates under. 

That led us to a simple question:

The answer was no.

We decided to move our website, CRM and email marketing to a self-hosted, open-source platform.

The difference may sound subtle, but we think it matters. Previously, we focused on using our chosen software in the most privacy-conscious and European way possible. Now, we're also reducing the underlying dependency itself.

With our new setup, we have control over the software, the infrastructure it runs on and the data. We are not dependent of a US SaaS provider and have more freedom to decide how our platform develops in the future.

There's also a straightforward business advantage: cost. 

Large SaaS platforms offer an enormous amount of functionality and extensive subscriptions, but that can also mean paying for features and complexity you don't necessarily need. By choosing a solution that better matches our actual requirements, we've been able to simplify our setup and reduce (or even almost eliminate) recurring software costs.

More control, less dependency and lower costs. For us, that made the move a logical next step.

It's easy to turn digital sovereignty into a simple discussion about European versus US technology. We don't think that's particularly useful.

Using software from a US company doesn't automatically mean your data is poorly protected, just as choosing a European provider doesn't automatically solve every privacy or security question. Good data protection still depends on how technology is selected, configured and used.

Digital sovereignty adds another question to that discussion: how much control do you have over the technology your organisation depends on?

In the past, large US platforms have been the default choice for many European businesses. 
Need cloud infrastructure? Choose a hyperscaler. 

Need CRM? Pick one of the familiar platforms. 

Need analytics, collaboration or marketing software?  Again, there are a few obvious names.

Each choice can make perfect sense on its own. But add them together and you may discover that a significant part of your business depends on technology, pricing models and decisions outside your own control.

Not because someone deliberately chose that strategy, but simply because these platforms became the default. And since everybody uses them, why being the exception.

Digital sovereignty doesn't mean replacing every US tool tomorrow. Nor should organisations move technology simply because there is a European alternative. But it is always good to review your choices from the past.

This maybe means making new more conscious choices.

Look at the systems your organisation relies on. Where does your data live? Who controls the underlying technology? How portable is your data? What happens if pricing or conditions change? How difficult would it be to switch? And are you paying for functionality and complexity you don't actually need? 

Then look at the alternatives.

European technology providers and open-source solutions have come a long way. They might not always have the biggest name or the largest marketing budget, but increasingly they offer serious alternatives that give organisations more flexibility, control and freedom.

Next to that, they offer cost-effective solutions.

Moving away from HubSpot isn't the ‘Europe first’ finish line for Tilaa and we're not claiming that replacing one platform suddenly makes us 100% digitally sovereign.

It shows we are looking critically at the technology we use to run our own business and ask ourselves where we can reduce unnecessary dependencies. Sometimes that means choosing open source. Sometimes self-hosting. But we try to make it European by default.

What matters is that the choice is conscious.

Because digital sovereignty isn't only something for governments, policymakers or IT departments to discuss. European businesses can contribute through the technology decisions they make every day.

So start by looking at your own stack. Find the dependencies that deserve another look, explore the alternatives and decide whether the default choice is still the best choice.

Digital sovereignty doesn't happen overnight. 

It happens one conscious technology choice at a time.