Op-Ed: The new reality of maritime technology procurement

Kirstie Williams

Maritime technology procurement has changed quietly, but fundamentally.

A decade ago, many buying decisions were driven by features, price comparisons and implementation speed. Today, those factors still matter, but they are no longer decisive on their own. What increasingly determines outcomes is risk: operational risk, cyber risk and the risk of choosing a solution that cannot keep pace with a rapidly changing regulatory and technical environment.

This shift is visible across regions and vessel types. Buyers arrive better informed, more technically aware and far clearer about the consequences of failure. They are not simply purchasing software. They are making long-term decisions about how resilient their operations will be at sea.

Security now dominates most procurement discussions. Regulation, compliance requirements and growing awareness of cyber threats have pushed it firmly to the top of the agenda. The presence of dedicated cyber security professionals within ship owning and ship management organizations has reinforced this change, raising expectations around accreditation, governance and assurance.

However, security alone is not sufficient.

In practice, a secure system that fails operationally creates its own risk. When technology does not work reliably at sea, crews and shore teams are forced to intervene. Manual processes emerge, exceptions become normalized and workarounds take hold. These are precisely the conditions under which exposure increases.

This is why reliability now sits alongside security in serious buying decisions, even when it is not always labelled as such. Buyers want systems that continue to function through connectivity disruption, changing bandwidth conditions and operational pressure, without demanding constant attention from already stretched teams.

Another notable change is the growing importance of future roadmaps. Buyers are no longer satisfied with a snapshot of current functionality. They want to understand how a solution will evolve as cyber requirements tighten, connectivity models shift and digital dependence onboard increases.

This reflects a broader reality in shipping. Many organizations have spent years adapting shore-based tools for vessel use. In some cases, those adaptations have worked. In others, they have introduced fragility that was manageable when digital systems were peripheral, but is increasingly difficult to justify as reliance grows.

Support has therefore become part of procurement evaluation again, not as a secondary consideration but as a component of assurance. When issues arise at sea, access to expertise that understands the operational context matters more than theoretical response times.

Cost remains part of the conversation, but it no longer leads it. Buyers are more willing to invest where they see clear operational value, reduced risk and confidence that a provider understands the maritime environment rather than attempting to impose a generic solution upon it.

One question now consistently distinguishes robust procurement decisions from fragile ones: what happens when the vessel is offline?

The answer reveals whether a solution has been designed for the realities of maritime operations, or merely adapted to them.

For technology providers, this shift places greater responsibility on understanding not just customer requirements today, but how those requirements will change. For buyers, it reinforces the importance of evaluating long-term suitability rather than short-term convenience.

Maritime technology procurement has become less about selecting tools and more about securing solutions which deliver resilience and reassurance; from providers who commit to growing and evolving their products in line with ever changing market requirements. That reality is shaping decisions across the industry now and for the future.

Kirstie Williams is the head of sales, Northern Europe and the Americas, for GTMaritime.