Logo
Become a Client

Resource Regions: Western Europe

Why scaling AI and proving ROI are now the real challenge for European organizations.

What comes next is far less straightforward.

For some time, the European AI narrative was fairly comfortable: lots of enthusiasm, plenty of pilots, and just enough regulatory drama to keep things interesting. Companies could experiment broadly, point to a few wins, and call it a strategy.

IDC’s recent research, based on a survey of 200+ European organizations conducted in late 2025, tells a story that is a tad inconvenient for anyone still in “innovation exploration” mode: more than half of European companies report that over 50% of their AI projects have already delivered measurable business outcomes. This is no longer a single pilot result; it is becoming a pattern. And patterns have a tendency to change expectations.

Europe is past the “AI is interesting” phase, but not quite at “AI is effortless” either. Most organizations are somewhere in the messy middle: proof points, momentum, but still unable to explain why that momentum is not turning into something more systematic. Nearly 9 in 10 say their ability to scale AI has improved. And yet, a large portion is operating with what you might call partial discipline. They are moving forward, but without the playbooks, governance structures, and execution models that make scaling feel less like controlled improvisation.

The technology was never the hard part of AI scaling
European organizations are not struggling to build AI. They are struggling to absorb it. When asked what most prevents them from realizing the full potential of their AI investments, the top answers were competition with other transformation priorities, regulatory uncertainty, resistance to process change, difficulty proving ROI, and budget pressure. None of these are technology problems. The blockers are organizational, political, and structural. Throwing more engineering at them will not help.

This is, in fact, a sign of progress. Europe’s AI constraints have shifted from technical feasibility to enterprise commitment, which means the technology has largely done its job. The hard part now is everything surrounding it: sponsorship that survives the next budget cycle, processes redesigned after years of inertia, and ROI demonstrated clearly enough to compete with every other initiative in the budget allocation process. AI is now being tested as a business program, and business programs depend on organizational discipline.

But can organizations measure AI ROI and business impact?

European organizations are no longer just tracking model performance or project completion. Operational efficiency, user adoption, business KPIs, and financial outcomes are all on the scorecard now. This removes a certain flexibility that AI teams might have previously enjoyed. A technically elegant deployment that nobody uses is no longer a qualified success. It is simply not a success.

The encouraging news is that many organizations are starting to respond, with a clear move toward formal business metrics and ROI logic built in from the start.

The gap is widening

Europe’s AI market is entering a separation phase. This is the point where the gap between organizations that can operationalize AI and those still generating isolated use cases starts to widen. The organizations pulling ahead are building the necessary connective tissue: prioritization discipline, outcome measurement, and governance that works at speed. Meanwhile, those still in exploration risk producing impressive narratives about their AI journey while actual business outcomes remain limited.

For enterprise leaders, IDC research is clear about what separates the scalers from the stragglers:

  • Stop treating AI as a project portfolio. Projects create motion; systems create lasting value.
  • Build measurement in from day one, not just as good practice, but because organizations that cannot prove value will lose internal budget competition to those that can.
  • Treat governance as a speed advantage. Organizations that build compliance into reusable controls will move faster, not slower, than those handling it case by case.

For vendors and service providers, the message is equally clear: more features are not the answer to executive skepticism. Proof of business impact is becoming a primary buying criterion. The ability to show how value will be measured, attributed, and reviewed matters more than model benchmarks.

Want to go deeper?
These dynamics are part of a broader shift shaping IT investment across EMEA in 2026. In our recent webcast, IDC analysts explored where growth is materialising, how AI maturity is evolving from pilots to scaled deployment, and what separates organisations that are successfully operationalising AI from those that are not.

If you missed it, the session is now available on demand. Watch it here and get the full data-driven perspective for your strategy.

Ewa Zborowska - Research Director, AI, Europe - IDC

Analyst Profile
Ewa Zborowska is an experienced technology professional with 25 years of expertise in the European IT industry. Since 2003, she has been a member of the IDC team, based in Warsaw, researching IT services markets. In 2018, she joined the European team with a specific emphasis on cloud and AI. Ewa is currently the lead analyst for IDC’s European Artificial Intelligence Innovations and Strategies CIS.

Digital sovereignty is moving from concept to strategic requirement. As organisations focus on managing IT risk, control, and compliance, expectations towards providers are rising. This blog explores why the “sovereign” label is no longer enough and what it takes to meet these new demands. 

Many technology providers in Europe today claim to offer “sovereign” solutions. 

But ask a simple follow-up question, what exactly makes them sovereign, and the answers quickly become less clear. 

At the same time, demand for digital sovereignty is increasing. Over the past 15 months, geopolitical and economic uncertainties have pushed the topic higher up the agenda. When asked about digital sovereignty, almost 50% of organisations globally say their interest has increased compared to the previous year. 

But focusing on geopolitics alone misses the bigger shift. 

Why digital sovereignty expectations are changing 

As interest grows, so do expectations. Digital sovereignty is no longer an abstract or purely regulatory concept. It is becoming an essential strategic requirement in IT decision-making. 

At the same time, it remains a source of confusion. Many organisations still struggle to define what sovereignty actually means in practice, what is required to achieve it, and whether they need it at all. And then you need to ask, who can you trust? And then you need to ask, who can you trust? 

This creates a gap in the market. Providers talk about sovereignty. Customers are still trying to understand it. 

What is really driving digital sovereignty adoption 

Despite the geopolitical backdrop, the main drivers are far more practical. 

Organisations are prioritising control over their data, stronger governance and compliance, and the ability to manage risk. In Europe in particular, protection against extra-territorial data requests has emerged as the highest concern. 

This is where expectations begin to change. 

More than 40% of organisations globally say they will increase the frequency and granularity of their reviews of IT vendors and platforms to better assess and manage this risk. Furthermore, when asked what was most needed to achieve data sovereignty, 85% cited enhanced tools and solutions for governance, risk and compliance as the extremely or very important. 

Thus, if digital sovereignty is ultimately about managing IT risk, it cannot be reduced to a label or a feature. It needs to be something that is tangible and can be clearly explained, implemented, and validated. 

This also changes the role of providers. They need to help organisations assess their risk appetite, manage that risk, and deliver the solutions required to meet these expectations. 

And this is where many providers are not yet aligned. 

What digital sovereignty actually requires 

Part of the challenge lies in how sovereignty is framed. It is often treated as a single capability, when in reality it spans multiple dimensions. 

One practical way to approach it is through three areas: data sovereignty, technical sovereignty, and operational sovereignty. These form the three key pillars of cloud sovereignty, which itself represents a subset of the broader concept of digital sovereignty. 

Together, these define how control is exercised across data, infrastructure, and operations. 

For providers, this raises the bar. Sovereignty is no longer something that can be communicated in broad terms. It needs to be articulated across these dimensions, in a way that is transparent and verifiable. 

Where sovereignty really matters: high-risk workloads 

It is also important to clarify where sovereignty actually needs to be applied. 

Sovereign requirements are typically focused on workloads that involve sensitive data, regulatory exposure, and or critical business processes. This increasingly includes certain AI use cases, where data control and model governance are essential. 

This is also where trust becomes central. 

Customers need confidence that sovereignty claims hold up under scrutiny, especially in high-risk scenarios. It is no longer enough to state that a solution is sovereign or to only address isolated aspects such as data residency or localisation. 

Providers need to demonstrate how sovereignty is ensured, where the boundaries lie, and what guarantees are in place. This assurance must extend across the entire partner ecosystem, from primary providers to their partners and beyond. 

From positioning to proof 

The conversation around digital sovereignty is evolving quickly. Expectations are rising, and with them, the level of scrutiny applied to providers. 

In this environment, sovereignty is no longer a positioning or marketing statement. It is something that needs to be clearly defined, agreed upon by all stakeholders, consistently implemented, and credibly demonstrated. 

For many providers, that requires a shift. From broad claims to precise explanations. From messaging to evidence. 

And ultimately, from sovereignty as a label to sovereignty as a trust model that delivers autonomy, control, transparency, and resilience. 

If you are reassessing how to position and deliver digital sovereignty, speaking to an expert can help clarify what your customers will expect next. Request a call here. 

Join the webcast “Digital Sovereignty Beyond the Label: How Customer Expectations Are Changing” at the link here.

 
All data sources: IDC Europe, Worldwide Digital Sovereignty survey 2025, July 2025 

Rahiel Nasir - Research Director, European Cloud Practice, Lead Analyst, Digital Sovereignty - IDC

Analyst Profile
Rahiel Nasir is responsible for leading and contributing to IDC's European cloud and cloud data management research programs, as well as supporting associated consulting projects. In addition, he leads IDC's worldwide Digital Sovereignty research program. Nasir has been watching technology markets and writing about them throughout his professional life.

Wholesale has traditionally been a scale-driven business focused on connectivity and volume. That model is now evolving. 

Across the telecom industry, wholesale providers are rethinking how they deliver value, moving toward more flexible, platform-based approaches that go beyond traditional network services. 

This shift is being driven by changing customer expectations, new technologies, and increasing pressure to create sustainable growth. 

Wholesale telecommunications is shifting toward platform-based models 

IDC highlights 2026 as a key moment in the transition toward more automated, API-driven, and AI-enabled wholesale models. 

Rather than offering static products, wholesale providers are increasingly expected to deliver services that are more flexible, on-demand, and easier to integrate into customer environments. 

This includes: 

  • Greater use of APIs to expose network capabilities  
  • Increased automation across ordering, provisioning, and operations  
  • More dynamic and usage-based pricing models  

As a result, wholesale telecommunications is gradually adopting characteristics typically associated with cloud platforms. 

Customer expectations in wholesale telecommunications are changing 

Wholesale customers are no longer only looking for access to infrastructure. They expect solutions that can adapt to their specific requirements and business models. 

Flexibility, scalability, and ease of integration are becoming key decision factors. 

This is particularly relevant as enterprise and service provider customers operate in more complex, multi-vendor environments and require greater control over how services are consumed and managed. 

Wholesale providers are responding by offering more configurable services and by simplifying how customers interact with their networks. 

Ecosystems are becoming more important in wholesale telecom 

As wholesale models evolve, the role of ecosystems is expanding. 

Providers are increasingly working with partners to extend coverage, enhance capabilities, and co-develop new services. This includes collaboration across technology vendors, platform providers, and other telecom operators. 

At the same time, there is a growing focus on standardization, particularly around APIs and emerging technologies, to enable interoperability and scale across ecosystems. 

Managing these ecosystems effectively is becoming a key capability for wholesale providers. 

Vendor strategies in telecommunications are evolving 

This shift is happening alongside changes in how telcos approach their vendor landscape. 

Operators are becoming more selective and are reducing the number of partners they work with. There is a clear move toward strategic partnerships with vendors that can deliver end-to-end capabilities and take on greater accountability. 

This reflects the increasing complexity of telecom environments, where fragmented ownership across multiple vendors can slow down transformation and increase operational challenges. 

Fewer, more integrated partners can help simplify execution and align outcomes more closely with business objectives. 

What this means for wholesale telecom providers 

For wholesale telcos, the transition to platform-based models requires both technology and organizational change. 

This includes: 

  • Modernizing legacy systems to support API-driven services  
  • Investing in automation and AI capabilities  
  • Rethinking product design toward more modular, flexible offerings  
  • Building and managing partner ecosystems more actively  

At the same time, providers need to balance innovation with the realities of existing infrastructure and customer commitments. 

Wholesale telecommunications is becoming a strategic growth lever 

Wholesale is no longer just a supporting function within telecom organizations. It is increasingly seen as an area for differentiation and new revenue generation. 
Platform-based models, ecosystem collaboration, and more flexible service delivery approaches are opening up new opportunities to monetize infrastructure and reach new customer segments. 

As these models mature, the ability to execute effectively will determine which providers can translate this shift into sustainable growth. 

Download the full analysis 

Wholesale transformation is one of several trends reshaping the telecom market. In the IDC eBook State of the Telco Market 2026, you’ll find detailed data, forecasts, and analysis on platform-based models, API strategies, and evolving telco business models. 

Download the eBook to explore how wholesale is evolving and what it means for telecom providers. 

If you’re currently evaluating how platform models or ecosystem strategies could impact your wholesale business, our experts are happy to exchange perspectives. Whether you’re just starting or already transforming your model, we welcome the conversation. Get in touch with our team to continue the discussion. 

Jan Hein Bakkers - Senior Research Director, European Infrastructure and Telecoms - IDC

Analyst Profile
Jan Hein Bakkers is responsible for IDC's research efforts in the European enterprise and wholesale communications domain. His personal areas of expertise include internet access and WAN services, as well as wholesale connectivity markets. His research has a particular focus on the evolution of wholesale models, WAN transformation and the role of key growth segments, such as SD-WAN, cloud connectivity and very high bandwidth services within that. His work is published in IDC's EMEA Wholesale Telecoms Strategies and European Enterprise Communications Services programs, as well as the Worldwide Telecom Services Tracker. In addition, he provides his insights, opinions, and advice to a broad base of clients via custom engagements. He is a regular speaker at industry, client, and IDC events, and is frequently quoted in the press. Since joining IDC in 2001, he has analyzed a range of telecommunications and networking areas, including broadband equipment, TV services, and consumer multiplay strategies. He is based in the Netherlands and has degrees in international marketing and technical business administration.