When I ask ITAM professionals about their transition to the cloud, the responses are often similar: “It wasn’t my decision.” It’s striking how many people feel this way—decisions about moving from on-premises solutions to the cloud are being made at levels far removed from the people managing the technology. It’s the C-suite taking those calls in most cases without even consulting the ITAM teams.
It’s like choosing between renting a house or owning one. Renting offers flexibility and fewer upfront costs, but it comes with its own set of challenges. You’re at the mercy of your landlord’s whims—rent hikes, rules, and changes beyond your control. Similarly, cloud providers manage the infrastructure, but what happens if they decide to raise prices or change the rules? How much control are we giving away in the pursuit of convenience?
Let’s make no mistake: cloud providers are as significant as utility companies, and they are now in that “too big to fail” category—both for consumers and for stakeholders who have heavily invested in them. The tricky part? There is no regulator, only market forces. Unlike electricity, where you can switch providers if dissatisfied, you can’t easily switch cloud providers. Every “lift and shift” comes with steep costs due to embedded technology. The deeper your organisation is embedded in a cloud offering, the harder—and costlier—it becomes to get out.
Let me take a detour into the world of electricity, where some parallels to the cloud become clear.
If regulated electricity utilities can be so volatile, what does this mean for the cloud, where there’s far less oversight?
One of the loudest arguments for cloud adoption is cost savings. But is it really cheaper? I can’t help but question this narrative:
Organisations often find themselves trapped in cycles of dependency, paying more as cloud providers adjust pricing. Once deeply integrated into a cloud provider’s ecosystem, migration costs become astronomical, unlike electricity.
I’ve been mulling over hybrid cloud strategies as a potential compromise—keeping sensitive data on-premises while moving workloads that need scaling to peak demands to the cloud. It seems logical, but it requires a level of planning and foresight that many organisations lack.
Another layer to this discussion is sustainability. What’s the carbon footprint of hosting data in the cloud? And as we chase faster, newer technology (on-prem to the cloud), how much electronic waste are we generating?
I sometimes wonder if we’ve crossed the point of diminishing returns with computing power. Do all industries need this constant cycle of upgrades? While AI and machine learning demand cutting-edge technology and the cloud is probably required without a choice, many businesses can operate efficiently with basic tools for years and do not need the cloud for all their requirements.
The parallels between cloud computing and utilities like electricity are hard to ignore. Both involve large, centralised providers offering essential services. Both promise stability but often operate in ways that feel opaque to the end user once they control all of the market.
Perhaps I’m overthinking it. Maybe the cloud is just another step in our technological evolution. But as someone who sees the practical challenges firsthand, I can’t help but worry about the future implications:
These questions keep swirling in my mind.
I don’t have all the answers, but maybe that’s the point. This isn’t about prescriptive solutions—it’s about starting a conversation. It’s about asking uncomfortable questions and challenging the status quo.
So here’s to exploring the unknown, worrying about the future, and, hopefully, finding better ways to navigate this complex, cloudy world.
This blog is by Guest Writer Chris Augustin. Chris is a Senior Customer Success Manager with extensive experience within the IT Asset Management (ITAM) industry. In his current role, he engages with hundreds of ITAM professionals monthly, helping them utilise LISA training designed to enhance their skills and knowledge.