Cooperation Between Companies and Suppliers: How It’s Changing and What Not to Overlook
Executive snapshot
Project-based delivery can’t keep up with continuous change. Enterprise agreements close the gap: a long-term model that preserves context and control, speeds up prioritisation and delivery, and improves systems continuously without disrupting operations.
The pace of technological change has shifted up a gear
The rise of AI, automation, and especially AI agents is changing not only which technologies companies use, but – more importantly – how fast their technology environments must evolve. Change no longer arrives as a single, large transformation program, but as a continuous stream of smaller and major adjustments across architecture, processes, and operations.
Modernization is moving from an episodic activity to a continuous discipline. It requires ongoing optimization, security updates, real‑time data work, and the ability to respond quickly to new business and regulatory demands. That creates entirely new requirements for how IT is governed and supported.
This shift is not just anecdotal. According to Gartner, more than 70% of enterprise organizations say the pace of technological change exceeds the capacity of their internal IT teams – especially in AI, automation, and cybersecurity. At the same time, technology debt is growing: McKinsey has long pointed out that 20–40% of large companies’ IT budgets are spent merely to keep the lights on, not on innovation or strategic development.
Internal IT teams remain essential for stability, security, and deep knowledge of the environment. But they are also under increasing pressure: track technology trends, assess investments, manage technical debt, integrate new AI capabilities, and still support day‑to‑day operations. This is not about competence. It is about capacity, focus, and pace.
The “deliver and leave” model no longer works
At the same time, the nature of technology solutions themselves is changing. Most enterprise systems no longer have a clearly defined end of life. After deployment comes a period of continuous adjustments, extensions, integrations, and optimization – often across several domains at once.
Go‑live is therefore no longer seen as the finish line. It is a transition point after which the harder work begins: operating in the real world, adapting to change, and continuously increasing the solution’s value.
— Max Vrána, Chief Growth Officer, Trask
In this context, project‑based collaboration with external vendors becomes inefficient –not because of delivery quality, but because it loses continuity, context, and the ability to respond in time to changes that arrive outside the project plan. Every new project means resetting ways of working, re‑explaining the environment, and re‑balancing speed and stability.
How large enterprises are responding to technological change
This shift has been visible much earlier – especially in the United States. Large organizations increasingly work with technology partners through long‑term frameworks that are not tied to individual projects, but to ongoing support, development, and modernization of the technology landscape.
The reason is pragmatic. Companies have calculated that the greatest value is not created during implementation itself, but:
- in deciding what to invest in and what to postpone,
- in systematically reducing technical debt,
- in continuously introducing innovation without disrupting operations,
- in responding faster to changes in strategy, the market, or regulation,
- and in making better use of new technologies, including AI agents.
All of this requires a partner who knows the organization over time and can work with its evolving context – not only respond to requests but actively contribute to the company’s technology direction.
What companies gain from a long‑term partnership
A long‑term collaboration framework does not mean losing control. Quite the opposite. The company gains a partner with enough knowledge of the environment to:
- make qualified recommendations on technology priorities aligned with the business,
- flag risks and technical debt before they show up in production,
- systematically bring innovation instead of reactive fixes,
- support continuous modernization without disruptive step‑changes,
- and help align technology evolution with the company’s long‑term strategy.
Market experience shows that where a technology partner has a long‑term mandate and the client’s trust, a tangible shift happens. Decisions are faster, priorities are clearer, and investments go where they have real business impact. Companies can also experiment and innovate more quickly without jeopardizing operational stability or security.
Enterprise agreement: A new standard for collaboration
In enterprise environments, this type of collaboration is often referred to as an enterprise agreement. It is not a one‑size‑fits‑all solution, nor a replacement for project governance. It is a framework that reflects reality: technology now requires continuous care, optimization, and development – not a one‑off delivery.
An enterprise agreement makes it possible to set up collaboration so that the technology partner can operate as a natural extension of internal IT, with clear priorities, accountability, and a long‑term view.
From theory to practice: Managing change vs. merely reacting
This shift is not theoretical. At Trask, we see that where collaboration is built on a long‑term framework – typically through an enterprise agreement – results come very quickly. Not because of a different kind of technology, but because of a different kind of relationship.
More trust means more openness. Better knowledge of the environment enables more precise recommendations on where to invest and where to slow down. Continuous collaboration creates space to propose innovations proactively – before a need becomes a problem or competitors seize the opportunity.
The biggest difference is when technology stops being handled project by project. When we have trust and long‑term context, we can help clients make better decisions about what to modernize, where to invest, and where to slow down. And that is often the difference today between companies that manage change and those that only react to it.
— Max Vrána, Chief Growth Officer, Trask
The old collaboration model is no longer enough
The relationship between companies and their IT partners is not changing because it is a new trend. It is changing because the pace of technological development, the push for AI‑driven innovation, and the need for continuous optimization have outgrown the old model. Internal IT remains a core pillar, but external partners are increasingly becoming part of the team. And technology is definitely moving from projects into the day‑to‑day management of the business.
Are you feeling the limits of project-based delivery? Let's Talk →
Read more insights
