Before Buying SaaS: Can Your Business Use Its Data After Leaving?
Ask about exit while choices remain
A provider demonstrating an export button has not shown that the business can actually switch systems after leaving. Executives should ask what data is returned, in which format, whether it remains readable and linked to evidence, and what time, cost and staffing are needed. This is not a reason to reject all SaaS; it clarifies the dependency accompanying its benefits.
UK government guidance on cloud lock-in distinguishes commercial constraints from technical dependencies and recognises that provider-specific services can justify some dependence. Here that is used as a business decision framework, not a law binding Thai companies or a claim that using several providers removes every risk.
Define what must remain usable
Have process owners identify what is needed after termination: master records, line items, attachments, approval history and linking identifiers. Separate data needed for continued processing from records retained for historical reading. A readable PDF may not support importing transactions elsewhere, while a CSV table may omit attachments or relationships.
Hypothetical example: a procurement system exports purchase orders, but quotation files and approvals remain behind links requiring the old service’s login. Once the account closes, the export may be insufficient for historical review. Ask about attachment delivery and identifier mapping before purchase instead of discovering the gap on migration day.
Test a sample with business-owner acceptance
Request a permitted test with synthetic data covering important cases, such as a multi-line document that is amended and has attachments. Export it and inspect it in a separate environment. Establish whether it opens completely, identifiers still link correctly and anything cannot be exported. Real customer data is unnecessary for a demonstration.
Business users who understand the records should accept results alongside the technical team. Opening a file or matching row counts is insufficient. Approval values, status codes or dates with special meaning require definitions. Record exceptions, impacts and the person accepting them rather than marking an undefined test as passed.
Estimate switching costs and contractual windows
Switching cost is more than an export charge. Include cleansing and conversion, testing, integrations, training and any period of paying for both systems. Estimates should state assumptions and unknowns. A vendor’s or procurement team’s free migration claim is not a substitute for the business’s total switching cost.
Have the contract owner review data-return rights, access after termination, assistance charges and deletion terms. Separate demonstration promises from binding commitments and consider applicable record-retention duties. Do not delete the old data merely because file transfer succeeded before the responsible person has approved retention and deletion.
Assign ownership to the dependency decision
Before approval, summarise the value of provider-specific capabilities, exit difficulty, test evidence and accepted risks. A valuable but hard-to-migrate service may be chosen with contingencies and review triggers instead of adding multiple systems without justification. If essential data cannot be exported and no alternative exists, escalate before committing.
Assign someone to revisit the assessment when modules are added, contracts change or data growth invalidates estimates. For discussion with Kerwin & Vance, bring process maps, ongoing data needs and provider proposals to assess accounting, controls, contracts and technology together. Approval should reflect real operations, not just a package that appears easy to cancel.
