Maritime technology procurement has undergone a quiet but fundamental shift over the past decade. While features, price, and implementation speed once drove buying decisions, today’s landscape is shaped by a new priority: risk. Operational risk, cyber risk, and the risk of choosing a solution that can’t keep pace with the rapidly evolving regulatory and technical environment now dominate procurement discussions.
Buyers are arriving better informed, more technically aware, and clearer about the consequences of failure. They’re no longer just purchasing software; they’re making long-term decisions about the resilience of their operations at sea. This shift is evident across regions and vessel types, reflecting a broader industry trend towards prioritising security and reliability.
Security has risen to the top of the agenda, driven by regulation, compliance requirements, and growing awareness of cyber threats. The presence of dedicated cyber security professionals within ship owning and ship management organisations has reinforced this change, raising expectations around accreditation, governance, and assurance.
However, security alone is not sufficient. A secure system that fails operationally creates its own risks. When technology doesn’t work reliably at sea, crews and shore teams are forced to intervene, leading to manual processes, exceptions, and workarounds that increase exposure. This is why reliability now sits alongside security in serious buying decisions, even when it’s 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. As Kirstie Williams, Head of Sales for Northern Europe and the Americas at GTMaritime, notes, “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.”
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, where many organisations have spent years adapting shore-based tools for vessel use, with varying degrees of success.
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.
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.
In essence, maritime technology procurement has become less about selecting tools and more about securing solutions that deliver resilience and reassurance. This reality is shaping decisions across the industry now and for the future, as buyers seek providers who commit to growing and evolving their products in line with ever-changing market requirements.