Enterprise software decisions have shifted from IT operations to financial strategy, with vendor-driven upgrades increasingly affecting capital allocation, risk and business flexibility. According to Teko Mojaki, CFOs are increasingly seeking greater control over timing and investment decisions to protect value and prioritise growth initiatives.
Enterprise software used to be an IT lifecycle decision, but it isn’t anymore. This is according to Teko Mojaki, Managing Director, Spinnaker Support in South Africa. He says that across South Africa’s largest organisations, core platforms such as ERP, databases, virtualisation have become embedded in how revenue is recognised, costs are controlled and regulators are satisfied: “They are not back-office systems, but more financial infrastructure. And they are increasingly dictating capital allocation in ways many CFOs did not sign up for,” says Mojaki.
But the shift is easy to miss. Annual maintenance, which is typically 18% to 22% of licence value, still looks like a predictable operating expense. In reality, it has become a trigger for much larger, less predictable capital decisions.
Mojaki says that there are three forces driving this.
Lifecycle deadlines are hardening – this is forcing upgrades or extended support decisions. “What we are seeing is that licensing models are shifting toward subscriptions that increase long-term cost and reduce flexibility. And support entitlements are changing, often without a corresponding increase in value,” explains Mojaki.
He says that the consequence is simple. Decisions that should be aligned to business priorities are being dictated by vendor timelines and in his view, that is not a technology problem. It is a loss of financial control.
“When upgrades are forced, the real cost is not the programme itself, it is what gets displaced. Capital is pulled away from growth, automation and customer investment. Execution risk rises as large programmes are rushed and critical skills are diverted into compliance work. And in South Africa, the impact is amplified by currency exposure as dollar-based costs go against rand-based revenue,” says Mojaki.
It is the hidden tax of timing pressure, and it rarely appears in business cases, but it shows up in missed opportunities and strained organisations.
Recently launched into South Africa after years working indirectly, Spinnaker has been met with great demand: “CFOs are starting to respond as the question is no longer whether to modernise, it is about realising who controls the timing,’ according to Mojaki.
In any other capital-intensive environment, having options is valued. The ability to defer, sequence or redirect investment reduces risk and improves returns. Mojaki says that at last, enterprise software is now subject to the same logic.
“This is why alternative support models are gaining traction globally. The appeal is not technical, it is economic. Maintain stable systems, remove immediate upgrade pressure, and give the business the ability to decide when transformation actually makes sense”, explains Mojaki.
He says that it is not about avoiding modernisation but rather refusing to do it on someone else’s timetable.
The most effective organisations are not taking an all-or-nothing approach. They are segmenting their estates. Systems that require continuous regulatory updates remain on vendor support. Stable, low-change environments, where little new value is being consumed are managed differently.
Think of it like portfolio management, only it is applied to technology and comes with a higher governance bar. Frameworks such as King IV make it explicit: technology and information governance is a board responsibility. POPIA reinforces this with clear obligations around data access, security and third-party management. As a result, software support decisions are no longer procurement exercises. They are governance decisions with financial, operational and regulatory consequences.
For CFOs, four questions matter.
- What are we actually paying for? Many organisations fund entitlements they do not use.
- Where are we exposed to forced timing decisions? These are the real balance sheet risks.
- What optionality do we have? Without credible alternatives, there is no negotiating position.
- And most importantly: if capital is released, where does it go?
Because cost reduction is not the objective, reallocation is. “The organisations that win are not those that spend less on legacy systems. They are the ones that convert that spend into measurable outcomes such as automation, better data, improved customer experience, stronger resilience. That is where value is created,” says Mojaki.
The broader implication is unavoidable. Enterprise software has moved to the centre of financial strategy. It now shapes how capital is deployed, how risk is managed, and how quickly organisations can respond to change. The real question for CFOs is no longer whether to upgrade. It is whether those upgrades happen on the vendor’s terms or on the businesses. Ends
About Spinnaker Support
Co-owned by African Rainbow Capital, Spinnaker Support (PTY) Ltd delivers, independent third-party software support, and expert services, for Oracle, SAP, and VMware into the South African and Sub-Saharan Africa markets. It is a subsidiary of Denver Colorado, USA-based Spinnaker Support LLC.
Trusted by companies worldwide, including those in highly regulated industries, Spinnaker Support empowers organisations to take control of their IT strategy. By breaking free from vendor-imposed roadmaps, aligning software management with business objectives, reducing costs, and maximising ROI, Spinnaker provides customers with the power of choice. With a strategic approach to security, performance, resource allocation, and managed services, Spinnaker Support ensures long-term IT efficiency and success.
For more information contact:
Samantha Hogg-Brandjes | GinjaNinja | +27844584857 | samantha@ginjaninja.co.za