Market Correction as a Strategic Opportunity

A Necessary Turning Point 

For years, the BI and analytics resource market followed a familiar pattern: overwhelming demand, scarce capacity, and projects under constant time pressure. “Capacity at any cost” was often the only way to get initiatives moving at all.

In 2026, this dynamic has shifted noticeably. Not because the need for data solutions has declined, but because the nature of demand has fundamentally changed. Budgets are being scrutinized more closely, priorities are being reset, and the focus is moving away from pure implementation toward measurable value creation, stability, and architectural sustainability.

What we are seeing is not a collapse. It is a correction of expectations.

 
‍

Market Relaxation - But Not Where It Counts 

The market signals are clear: demand for IT and BI resources has cooled, and the availability of external capacity has increased. The „Hays Fachkräfte-Index IT“ reached one of its lowest levels in 2025 since late 2020, and current freelancer surveys show significantly higher uncertainty around follow-up assignments.

For procurement and controlling, this may initially look like an opportunity for cost optimization. But this is exactly where a critical strategic decision point emerges. While resource availability is improving, technical complexity, platform dependencies, and governance requirements are rising at the same time. The real bottleneck today is no longer staffing -  it is delivery capability.

‍

The Fallacy:
Why More Resources Don’t Mean Lower Risk 

In the current environment, the temptation is strong to rely on readily available individual resources to close gaps quickly and cost-effectively. Our project experience shows that this logic often backfires.

Capacity alone does not guarantee delivery. Without clear structures, delivery risk increases.

Typically driven by three factors:

• Bus Factor and Knowledge Dependency
  When architectural knowledge and operational logic reside with a single individual, fragile dependencies emerge. If that person leaves, knowledge is lost immediately, and recovery becomes expensive.
  
• Architectural Fragmentation
  Without an integrated team structure and shared standards, siloed solutions develop. They may work at handover, but they complicate scaling, maintenance, and further development.
  
• Insufficient Governance Depth
  Individual contributors tend to deliver exactly what was requested. Responsibility for platform integrity, security, and long-term operations often remains undefined.

What is saved today through cheaper capacity is frequently paid for several times over tomorrow - through rework, operational instability, and delayed outcomes.

‍

Ownership over Utilization:
The Currency of the Coming Years 

Organizations that succeed in this environment do not invest in hours. They invest in ownership and accountability. They look for partners willing to take responsibility for the system as a whole, not just to process tickets. Increased availability is of little value if no one owns operations, definitions, and quality in the end.

 ‍

Three Typical Patterns We See

• Case A: Governance & Ownership
  Projects appear “finished,” but documentation is missing, governance is unclear, and KPI definitions are disputed.
  The result: discussions about numbers instead of data-driven decisions.
  

• Case B: Single Point of Failure
  A data pipeline depends on one individual. After their departure, deployments are avoided, incidents are patched temporarily, and changes rely on gut feeling. Despite available capacity, progress stalls.
     
• Case C: Cost & Quality
  An MVP is built quickly, but without monitoring, cost guardrails, or quality criteria. Jobs run unnecessarily, transformations duplicate, and costs quietly rise - until Finance intervenes. Only then does stabilization     begin.
     
     
     

Proven Patterns for Reliable BI Setups 

Ina market that increasingly rewards substance, several success factors standout:

1. Data Products instead of One-Off Reports
   Data solutions are treated as products, with clear ownership, documentation, operation, and measurable business value.
      
2. Architectural Integrity
   Reducing technical debt and designing vendor-independent architectures is a prerequisite for scalability and longevity.
      
3. Operational Excellence & Cost Control
   Delivery capability now requires continuous transparency around performance and operating costs.
      
4. Governance as an Enabler
   Clear rules and standards accelerate delivery instead of slowing it down.
      
   
5. AI Readiness
   Without clean data models and ownership, AI does not scale, it simply introduces new risks.

‍

The inics Reality Check: Five Questions 

For an honest assessment of delivery capability, these five questions are a useful starting point:

1. Is business-critical domain knowledge redundantly secured, or tied to individuals?
2. Does our data architecture follow clear, traceable standards?
3. Do we have transparency over long-term platform and operating costs?
4. Can we demonstrate data quality and integrity through automation?
5. Are we securing reliable outcomes, or merely buying capacity?

If more than two of these raise uncertainty, the issue is rarely resources. It is usually structural.

‍

Conclusion - Quality as a Stabilizing Force 

The current market correction is not an invitation to bargain hunting. It is a stress test for delivery capability. The winners of the coming years will be those who take ownership seriously, design architecture deliberately, and assume responsibility for real outcomes. The market no longer rewards capacity - it rewards reliability.