Skip to main content

Influencing Cloud Buyers' (Not So) Collective Choices

Peter Tsai
SWZD

We have good and bad news for cloud vendors catching their breath post-pandemic: there's little time to rest. The boom of buyers adopting cloud tech to support the initial rush to remote work in 2020 might be behind us, but that was only the beginning.


In 2021, Spiceworks Ziff Davis (SWZD) conducted a survey of 500+ cloud decision makers — 300+ IT decision makers (ITDMs) and 200+ business decision makers (BDMs) — to gain insights into buying patterns a year into the pandemic as the demand for tech to support flexible work arrangements rises.

The survey says: A whopping 80% of decision makers said that cloud technologies are useful for supporting remote workers. Also, organizations with flexible work policies are more likely to use cloud technologies — and make a decision to buy them more quickly: 31% of organizations that have flexible remote work arrangements complete the cloud buying process in less than three months vs. 25% of organizations that don't allow remote work.

Analysis revealed insights on the cloud buying collective — a group of stakeholders in an organization that influences tech purchase decisions — including some unexpected differences between the ITDMs and BDMs within them.

Don't worry: Engaging buyers isn't complicated, if you know who they are and what they're looking for (or better yet, how they look for it).

Cloudy with a Chance of Adoption

The move to the cloud shows no signs of slowing down in the coming years, even as some of the workforce returns to physical offices. By 2023, 67% of companies plan to adopt at least one new type of cloud technology, and 50% of all business workloads are expected to run in the cloud.

Among the many technologies companies going remote will leverage — cloud-file sharing, cloud backup and recovery, cloud-based storage, software-as-a-service, etc. — solutions to secure cloud infrastructure and cloud-based security solutions are poised to see the most adoption growth over the next two years (18 and 16 percentage points, respectively), with usage accelerating at an even faster rate among businesses that support remote workers.

For example, a majority of companies (51%) that support flexible work plan to adopt solutions for securing cloud infrastructure by 2023, compared to only 28% of companies that don't support flexible work arrangements.

The Collective Choice on Cloud

In the vast majority of organizations (91%), there's a buying collective, meaning there's no single decision maker that exclusively owns the entire cloud buying process. Instead, 6 - 8 decision makers within an organization comprise the "buying collective" on average. These stakeholders tend to consider the purchase through their own unique lens, and their views influence their organization's final decision to varying degrees throughout the buying journey.

There are two main groups of players in the cloud buying collective: ITDMs and BDMs. ITDMs determine needs on the front end, evaluate solutions, and advise BDMs on purchase decisions. BDMs approve funds for purchases, make final purchase decisions, and sign-off on purchases.

While these two groups play different roles in the buying process, they do agree on some things. When these stakeholders research potential solutions, ITDMs and BDMs both believe it's most important that technologies offer reliability/availability, ease-of-use, satisfactory total cost of ownership (TCO), and adequate security capabilities/features.

When looking for information about a cloud product, both ITDMs and BDMs also seek transparent pricing information, product demos/walkthroughs, detailed product specs/technical information, deployment guides/documentation, and side-by-side feature comparisons of similar products.

When it comes to cost, however, the two groups see things a little differently:

■ 62% of BDMs believe using public cloud is cheaper than self-hosting applications, while only 46% of ITDMs believe this to be true.

■ 55% of BDMs say their organizations would rather pay for tech infrastructure as an operational expense (OpEx) rather than a less frequent but larger capital expense (compared to 47% if ITDMs).

■ 44% of BDMs in the US said their organization prefers OpEx over CapEx, compared to only 27% of ITDMs.

■ 59% of BDMs said using cloud services can reduce the need for developing specialized IT skills and expertise in-house, compared to 50% of ITDMs.

■ BDMs are more likely than ITDMs (49% vs. 39%) to believe their organization follows a "cloud-first" technology strategy.

Connecting with Cloud Buyers

Marketers selling cloud solutions will be most effective at engaging members of the buying collective by understanding the pain-points of both ITDMs and BDMs, and tailoring content and outreach efforts for each group.

Additionally, both groups believe specific types of content best help them understand what it's like to use a cloud solution (e.g., demos/walk throughs, how-to guides, hands-on labs, product reviews).

Notice the one thing each of these content types have in common?

They each give the buyer an opportunity to "try before they buy" or offer a better sense of what it's like to actually use the cloud solution, whether that's through use of the interface, peer feedback, or online video.

In many cases, cloud buyers want to connect with brands as much as marketers want to engage with them. To optimize their marketing efforts, cloud vendors need to understand what their buyers really want, and cater to their content needs.

Interested in learning more? Check out our more in-depth cloud research on SWZD.com.

Peter Tsai is Head of Technology Insights at SWZD

Hot Topics

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...

Influencing Cloud Buyers' (Not So) Collective Choices

Peter Tsai
SWZD

We have good and bad news for cloud vendors catching their breath post-pandemic: there's little time to rest. The boom of buyers adopting cloud tech to support the initial rush to remote work in 2020 might be behind us, but that was only the beginning.


In 2021, Spiceworks Ziff Davis (SWZD) conducted a survey of 500+ cloud decision makers — 300+ IT decision makers (ITDMs) and 200+ business decision makers (BDMs) — to gain insights into buying patterns a year into the pandemic as the demand for tech to support flexible work arrangements rises.

The survey says: A whopping 80% of decision makers said that cloud technologies are useful for supporting remote workers. Also, organizations with flexible work policies are more likely to use cloud technologies — and make a decision to buy them more quickly: 31% of organizations that have flexible remote work arrangements complete the cloud buying process in less than three months vs. 25% of organizations that don't allow remote work.

Analysis revealed insights on the cloud buying collective — a group of stakeholders in an organization that influences tech purchase decisions — including some unexpected differences between the ITDMs and BDMs within them.

Don't worry: Engaging buyers isn't complicated, if you know who they are and what they're looking for (or better yet, how they look for it).

Cloudy with a Chance of Adoption

The move to the cloud shows no signs of slowing down in the coming years, even as some of the workforce returns to physical offices. By 2023, 67% of companies plan to adopt at least one new type of cloud technology, and 50% of all business workloads are expected to run in the cloud.

Among the many technologies companies going remote will leverage — cloud-file sharing, cloud backup and recovery, cloud-based storage, software-as-a-service, etc. — solutions to secure cloud infrastructure and cloud-based security solutions are poised to see the most adoption growth over the next two years (18 and 16 percentage points, respectively), with usage accelerating at an even faster rate among businesses that support remote workers.

For example, a majority of companies (51%) that support flexible work plan to adopt solutions for securing cloud infrastructure by 2023, compared to only 28% of companies that don't support flexible work arrangements.

The Collective Choice on Cloud

In the vast majority of organizations (91%), there's a buying collective, meaning there's no single decision maker that exclusively owns the entire cloud buying process. Instead, 6 - 8 decision makers within an organization comprise the "buying collective" on average. These stakeholders tend to consider the purchase through their own unique lens, and their views influence their organization's final decision to varying degrees throughout the buying journey.

There are two main groups of players in the cloud buying collective: ITDMs and BDMs. ITDMs determine needs on the front end, evaluate solutions, and advise BDMs on purchase decisions. BDMs approve funds for purchases, make final purchase decisions, and sign-off on purchases.

While these two groups play different roles in the buying process, they do agree on some things. When these stakeholders research potential solutions, ITDMs and BDMs both believe it's most important that technologies offer reliability/availability, ease-of-use, satisfactory total cost of ownership (TCO), and adequate security capabilities/features.

When looking for information about a cloud product, both ITDMs and BDMs also seek transparent pricing information, product demos/walkthroughs, detailed product specs/technical information, deployment guides/documentation, and side-by-side feature comparisons of similar products.

When it comes to cost, however, the two groups see things a little differently:

■ 62% of BDMs believe using public cloud is cheaper than self-hosting applications, while only 46% of ITDMs believe this to be true.

■ 55% of BDMs say their organizations would rather pay for tech infrastructure as an operational expense (OpEx) rather than a less frequent but larger capital expense (compared to 47% if ITDMs).

■ 44% of BDMs in the US said their organization prefers OpEx over CapEx, compared to only 27% of ITDMs.

■ 59% of BDMs said using cloud services can reduce the need for developing specialized IT skills and expertise in-house, compared to 50% of ITDMs.

■ BDMs are more likely than ITDMs (49% vs. 39%) to believe their organization follows a "cloud-first" technology strategy.

Connecting with Cloud Buyers

Marketers selling cloud solutions will be most effective at engaging members of the buying collective by understanding the pain-points of both ITDMs and BDMs, and tailoring content and outreach efforts for each group.

Additionally, both groups believe specific types of content best help them understand what it's like to use a cloud solution (e.g., demos/walk throughs, how-to guides, hands-on labs, product reviews).

Notice the one thing each of these content types have in common?

They each give the buyer an opportunity to "try before they buy" or offer a better sense of what it's like to actually use the cloud solution, whether that's through use of the interface, peer feedback, or online video.

In many cases, cloud buyers want to connect with brands as much as marketers want to engage with them. To optimize their marketing efforts, cloud vendors need to understand what their buyers really want, and cater to their content needs.

Interested in learning more? Check out our more in-depth cloud research on SWZD.com.

Peter Tsai is Head of Technology Insights at SWZD

Hot Topics

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...