Why dependence on infrastructure is no longer a marginal issue

Digital sovereignty is often discussed abstractly – in political programmes, strategy papers or long-term goals. In economic reality, however, the issue is much more concrete: where digital infrastructure becomes a prerequisite for stability, planning security and the ability to act.

The central question is no longer whether Europe is digitally dependent, but to what extent – and with what consequences.

Dependence is a reality, not an exception

How deep this dependence goes is proven by a recent survey by the digital association Bitkom. According to this, 89 percent of German companies that source digital technologies or services from abroad say they are dependent on it (Bitkom, 2025). 51 percent rate this dependence as strong, another 38 percent rather strong. The situation becomes even clearer when it comes to the question of one’s own ability to act: 57 percent of companies see themselves as able to survive for a maximum of one year without digital imports. Only 4 percent state that they can get by without corresponding imports in the long term (Bitkom, 2025). Digital dependence is therefore not a marginal phenomenon, but structurally anchored.

The dependence does not affect individual technologies, but almost all areas of digital value creation. According to Bitkom, 96 percent of companies use digital technologies or services from abroad. These include end devices, hardware components such as chips and sensors, software applications, cybersecurity solutions, and digital machines and IT services (Bitkom, 2025). The figures make it clear that digital infrastructure is internationally intertwined along the entire value chain – from the hardware level to software-based services.

USA and China as dominant dependency partners

Companies name the USA and China as the most important countries of origin of digital technologies. 67 percent of companies frequently import digital technologies from the United States, 58 percent often from China. At the same time, perceived dependence on both countries has increased significantly in 2025 (Bitkom, 2025).
According to their own estimates, German companies would only be able to spend around twelve months without digital imports from the USA, and only eleven months without imports from China (Bitkom, 2025). These assessments illustrate the close link between technological performance and international supply relationships. Parallel to the increasing dependency, trust in central countries of origin is declining. According to Bitkom (2025), 60 percent of companies say they trust the U.S. little or not at all. The share of companies with confidence in the United States fell from 51 to 38 percent.

This creates an area of tension: digital dependencies remain, while trust in political and economic conditions decreases. Digital infrastructure is increasingly perceived as a risk factor.

Digital sovereignty as a structural challenge

In this context, digital sovereignty is understood less as complete independence and more as the ability to identify, evaluate and control dependencies in a targeted manner. This is not about isolation, but about transparency, resilience and the ability to act. Digital dependency is the norm for European companies. Digital sovereignty is not a short-term solution, but a long-term design task. It requires transparency about existing dependencies, realistic risk assessments and conscious decisions along the digital infrastructure.

The central question is therefore not whether digital sovereignty is necessary, but how companies deal with existing dependencies and where they want to strengthen their ability to act in a targeted manner.

Source

• Bitkom e. V. (2025): Europe’s Path to Digital Sovereignty – Press Release, November 13, 2025

From idea to prototype: How IoT products are really created

Many companies underestimate how complex the journey from an idea to a working prototype in the IoT field is.
It often starts with a vision: a device should become “smart”, provide data or be controllable via app. On paper, it sounds simple. In practice, however, the path to this goal is often more complicated than you think.

Why end-to-end is crucial

• Consistent architecture
  When different teams work on individual components, friction often arises. A uniform architecture design ensures fewer interface problems, clear responsibilities and more stable systems.
• Faster time to market 

  The time-to-market is significantly shortened if hardware, firmware, backend and app are not developed one after the other, but in parallel – coordinated with each other.

• Scalability from the start 

  Systems that are modular and consistent can be expanded more easily – for example, for new devices, additional users or new functions.

• Security as part of the architecture
  Security concepts such as authentication, encryption and rights management must be integrated at an early stage. Subsequent solutions are usually prone to errors.

Why the idea alone is not enough

There is hardly a meeting in which someone does not say: “We’re going to do this digitally now.” But an idea alone does not bring users and no product to the market. The real problem lies in the idea of to break down like thisthat it becomes tangible in a prototype. And this is exactly where many stumble.

An example: A garage door opener should be controllable via app. Sounds trivial. But immediately questions arise:

• How secure is the connection?
• Do you need a gateway or is WLAN enough?
• Does the user have to be able to operate it without Internet access?

Only when these questions have been answered can a resilient prototype be designed.
A good IoT project doesn’t start with technology, but with use cases.

• Who uses the product?
• In what environment will it be used?
• What specific problem is to be solved?

A prototype that doesn’t answer a real question is a piece of electronics with no use. Once the use cases are clear, it’s time to design the architecture :

• Hardware: sensors, actuators, processors.
• Firmware: control, energy management, updates.
• Connectivity: BLE, LoRaWAN, NB-IoT or 5G?
• Software: App, Dashboard, Cloud.

That sounds like a clear list – but the selection decides whether a prototype is scalable later on or ends in a dead end.

The prototype is not an end product

A common mistake: the first prototype is treated as if it were almost ready for series production. This leads to frustration. A prototype has only one task: Answer questions.

• Does the hardware work as intended?
• Is the firmware stable enough?
• How reliable is the wireless connection?
• Do users accept the operation?

A prototype can wobble, be ugly and stand in the laboratory – the main thing is that it shows whether the idea works on the market. In IoT projects, time is often the deciding factor. If you think about it for months without having anything testable in your hands, you will not only lose the market, but also the courage of the team. A quick prototype keeps motivation high and shows investors or customers that the idea has substance.

Result

It’s a long way from the idea to the prototype – and yet it is precisely this step that is crucial for the success of an IoT product. A prototype is not a finished product, but a tool to identify risks at an early stage, validate technology and obtain user feedback. If you understand this, you will save money, time and nerves in the end.

Why End-to-End IoT Development Is Becoming a Key Success Factor

From idea to market — what many companies underestimate
More and more companies are looking to connect their products to the Internet of Things (IoT). Yet many underestimate how complex it is to build such a system from the ground up. App development often begins while the hardware is still unfinished, or firmware is written while the cloud platform is still under discussion. These mismatches delay projects, increase costs, and can introduce security risks.

End-to-end development is an approach designed to prevent these problems: all components — from embedded hardware and firmware to connectivity, backend systems, web platforms, mobile apps, and cloud services — are planned and developed as an integrated system from the very beginning.

Why end-to-end matters

• Consistent architecture
  When different teams work on isolated components, friction and interface issues often occur. A unified architecture reduces integration problems, clarifies responsibilities, and creates more stable systems.
• Faster time to market
  Hardware, firmware, backend, and apps developed sequentially can significantly delay launch. Parallel development with synchronized planning shortens time-to-market.
• Built for scalability
  Systems built on a modular and consistent architecture can be expanded more easily — whether adding new devices, more users, or new features.
• Security by design
  Security measures like authentication, encryption, and access control must be part of the architecture from the start. Retrofitted solutions are usually error-prone.

How end-to-end IoT projects are structured

End-to-end IoT projects typically start with concept workshops to define use cases. Prototypes follow, then pilot projects, testing, and full-scale production.
Throughout the process, embedded teams (C/C++), connectivity specialists (BLE, ZigBee, LoRaWAN, NB-IoT, Z-Wave), backend developers (Python, Django, FastAPI) and frontend/mobile teams (Angular, React, Swift, Kotlin, Flutter) work closely together.

The key advantage is that critical decisions — such as energy management, data architecture, communication protocols, or user interfaces — are made collaboratively from the start.

Real-world examples

End-to-end development has proven successful in many IoT sectors:

• Smart garage door systems have been developed where the gateway, app, dashboard, and cloud backend were created and tested as one unified system.
• In healthcare, devices often rely on sensors, firmware, mobile apps, and cloud platforms that must be tightly integrated.
• In industrial IoT (Industry 4.0), edge devices, web platforms, and AI-based analytics are increasingly planned as a single ecosystem.

Such integrated approaches reduce technical friction, simplify long-term maintenance, and accelerate future enhancements.

Conclusion

End-to-end development is not just a buzzword — it is a proven method to build IoT systems faster, more securely, and more reliably.
Companies that design all components in an integrated way from the start benefit from shorter development times, more stable products, and lower overall operating costs.

Why software projects often cost more than expected

The decision to have an individual software solution developed is often made with clear expectations in terms of cost and scope. But in reality, it shows again and again: Software projects end up costing more than originally calculated – even with professional planning.

In this article, we shed light on the most common causes of budget deviations and show how these challenges can be successfully overcome through a structured approach and transparent communication.

The development work

1. The invisible part of development work

Software development is much more than the visible front end or individual features. A large part of the effort is accounted for by aspects that are hardly noticeable from the outside, but are indispensable functionally and safety-wise:

• Integration: The new application must fit seamlessly into existing IT landscapes. Interfaces to third-party systems, authentication mechanisms or databases often cause unpredictable complexity.

Quality assurance & testing: Every change to the code must be tested – not only for the new function, but also with regard to interactions with existing components (regression tests).

2. Scope creep – creeping change in the range of functions

A typical pattern in projects: New ideas or requirements arise during implementation. What was initially planned as a simple application is gradually being expanded – for example, with additional login options, dashboards or automated notifications.

Particularly critical: In large organizations, the roles of budget managers and departmental decision-makers are often separated. Changes to the scope are made professionally without making the financial impact immediately transparent. The result: Cost increases are detected too late, and the course of the project becomes non-transparent.

3. Uncertainties and assumptions at the beginning of the project

At the beginning of the project, many requirements are based on assumptions – both on the part of the client and the developers. What is described as a “simple function” on the customer side can turn out to be much more complex to implement – or vice versa.

In addition, there are external factors such as the integration of new hardware (e.g. a new chipset), changes by platform providers or regulatory adjustments that create additional development requirements in the process. This dynamic is typical of innovative projects, but it has to be planned for.

4. The fallacy of the fixed price

A common request: a binding fixed price for the entire project. What sounds understandable is in many cases not realistic without sacrificing quality or excessive specification work.

After all, a real fixed price would require a complete technical description of the solution – including all detail cases, platform dependencies, quality criteria and future requirements. This effort is rarely proportionate to the benefit.

In practice, an agile, iterative approach with clear stages, planning cycles and prioritization is much more effective – and also more cost-efficient in the long term.

5. The often underestimated operating costs

Even after the successful completion of the product, there are ongoing costs that are often not taken into account at the beginning:

• Hosting & Infrastructure: Cloud resources, APIs, databases – all of which incur recurring operational costs.
• Maintenance & care: Security updates, adaptations to new operating systems (e.g. iOS/Android), further developments.
• Security management: Frameworks and libraries must be updated regularly to respond to new threats.
• Scaling: As the number of users grows, demands arise in terms of performance, data processing and load balancing.

If you don’t think about long-term costs, you risk budget bottlenecks in later project phases.

What companies can do to avoid unpleasant surprises

The following measures have proven to be effective in our project practice:

• Start with an MVP: A “minimum viable product” enables early feedback, reduces assumptions and saves costs initially.
• Structure communication: Clear goals, priorities and decision-making paths help to avoid misunderstandings.
• Plan for flexibility: Technical unpredictability is normal – it should be factored into the budget early on.
• Choosing the right development partner: Good partners provide advice not only technically, but also economically – transparently, forward-looking and realistically.

Individual software development is not a product purchase, but a process – with technical, organizational and economic interactions.

Industry 4.0 & IoT – The Digital Evolution of the Industrial World

Industry 4.0 has long been more than just a buzzword – it describes the profound transformation of industrial production through networking, automation and data-driven processes. At the heart of this development is the Internet of Things (IoT): Machines, sensors and products are networked with each other, communicate in real time – and provide valuable data for the optimization of entire production chains.

What is Industry 4.0?

The term describes the fourth industrial revolution – after mechanization, electrification and automation. Industry 4.0 means that production facilities smarter, autonomous and more connected become. Systems independently analyze data, make decisions or react flexibly to changes. The aim is to: to use resources more efficiently, minimize downtimes and manufacture individualized products economically.

How IoT is transforming industry

IoT is the technical engine behind Industry 4.0. Sensors measure temperatures, vibrations or energy consumption. Machines automatically report maintenance requirements (“predictive maintenance”) or adjust themselves. Entire supply chains can also be monitored and controlled in real time.

Example: A networked manufacturing robot uses production data to detect that a tool is worn out – before a quality problem occurs. The system automatically schedules maintenance without disrupting the production flow.

Implementation challenges

Despite all the advantages, the implementation remains complex. Companies are faced with questions such as:

• How do we integrate old plants (“brownfield”) into a new IoT system?
• How do we ensure data security and data protection ?
• Which platforms and standards are suitable for our requirements?
• Who takes responsibility for system and product safety?

This requires not only IT know-how – but also strategic thinking at the product level. Product managers play a central role when it comes to combining technological possibilities with real customer benefits.

What companies should do now

Industry 4.0 is not a finished product – but a path. If you want to be successful, you should:

• Start small – with pilot projects that bring measurable added value
• Rely on scalable platforms and open interfaces
• Think across departments: IT, production, product management and data protection must work together
• Investing in data literacy and security for the long term

Industry 4.0 and IoT offer enormous potential – from cost reduction to higher product quality and new business models. But if you want to use this potential, you have to plan early, think holistically and be prepared to change processes. The future of industry is networked, data-driven – and starts now.