How IT Systems Are Sometimes Designed to Fail — And What We Can Do About It

I’ve noticed a troubling trend in the world of IT: sometimes, systems seem to get worse on purpose. It feels counterintuitive, but powerful forces often keep us locked into poor IT solutions that stifle innovation and progress. From my experience, this isn’t just about technical limitations; it’s about monopolies and vested interests that resist change because disruption threatens their control.

One voice that really resonated with me is Finn Lutzov-Holm Myrstad from the Consumer Council, who argues that the so-called "drittifisering" — a Norwegian term for the intentional degradation or complicating of IT services — can actually be reversed. It requires us to openly recognize that monopolies kill innovation and that breaking up these entrenched systems is essential to unlock new possibilities.

What I find fascinating is how this applies especially in public sector IT. Too often, government digitalization projects get bogged down by legacy systems and vendor lock-ins, resulting in user experiences that are frustrating rather than empowering. But I firmly believe that by advocating for transparency, competition, and user-centered design, we can start to see IT solutions that actually serve people better.

From this, one practical takeaway for anyone involved with IT—whether as a user, developer, or policymaker—is to question the status quo. When something seems intentionally complicated or inefficient, there’s usually a deeper reason tied to business or political interests. By pushing for open standards and encouraging diversity among providers, we can break free from these constraints.

Ultimately, I’m optimistic. The more we discuss these challenges openly and push for systemic change, the better our digital future will look. IT doesn’t have to get worse over time—it can get dramatically better if we’re willing to challenge the monopolies holding us back.