Tag: IT

Company Check : Anthropic Targets Small Businesses With Plug-And-Play AI

Posted on by Paul Stradling

Anthropic is making a major push into the small business market with a new set of AI-powered tools designed to automate everyday operational tasks for companies that lack dedicated IT teams or enterprise AI budgets.

Why Anthropic Is Targeting Small Businesses

The move reflects a growing battle among AI firms to move beyond large enterprise customers and embed AI directly into the daily workflows of smaller businesses.

Anthropic says small businesses account for “44 per cent of U.S. GDP and employ nearly half the private-sector workforce”, yet AI adoption among smaller firms has remained relatively slow because many tools are still too complex, fragmented, or technical for non-specialist users.

The company says its new “Claude for Small Business” package is specifically designed for “those who have historically been last in line for new technology.”

Rather than requiring businesses to build AI systems from scratch, Anthropic is attempting to offer something much simpler, i.e., pre-built workflows that plug directly into software many smaller companies already use.

How The System Works

The system runs through Claude Cowork inside Anthropic’s desktop application.

Users can install the package with what Anthropic describes as “one toggle”, then connect services including QuickBooks, PayPal, HubSpot, Canva, DocuSign, Google Workspace, and Microsoft 365.

From there, Claude can carry out a wide range of business tasks using natural language instructions.

Anthropic says the package includes 15 “ready-to-run agentic workflows” covering areas such as finance, operations, sales, HR, marketing, and customer service, alongside another 15 reusable “skills” built around repetitive small business tasks.

Examples include generating payroll forecasts, chasing overdue invoices, reconciling accounts, preparing tax information, summarising contracts, cleaning up CRM databases, reviewing customer complaints, building marketing campaigns, and generating weekly business briefings.

Anthropic says users remain in control throughout the process, explaining that “Claude does the work; you approve before anything sends, posts, or pays.”

One example described by the company involves Claude comparing QuickBooks cash positions against incoming PayPal settlements, identifying overdue invoices, drafting reminder emails, and preparing a 30-day cash forecast automatically.

Another workflow analyses sales trends inside HubSpot before generating promotional campaigns and marketing assets through Canva.

The Bigger AI Strategy

The launch is important because it signals a major strategic change in how AI companies increasingly see the future of AI adoption.

For the past two years, much of the public AI discussion has focused heavily on chatbots and content generation. Increasingly, however, major AI firms are trying to position AI as an operational layer running quietly across existing business systems.

Anthropic is effectively attempting to turn Claude into a lightweight operational assistant embedded inside finance, administration, sales, and customer service processes.

That approach may prove particularly attractive for smaller businesses that often lack specialist staff across accounting, marketing, operations, compliance, and IT functions.

Anthropic co-founder Daniela Amodei said: “AI is the first technology that can finally close that gap,” referring to the historic resource imbalance between large enterprises and smaller firms.

She also said the goal is for Claude to “take on the work that piles up after hours”, while “people run the business.”

Importantly, Anthropic is also trying to lower the adoption barrier through training and education rather than technology alone.

The company has launched a free “AI Fluency for Small Business” course in partnership with PayPal, alongside live training events across US cities designed to help business owners understand how AI tools can actually fit into daily operations safely and realistically.

The Data Privacy Question

However, the launch also raises important questions around business data privacy and AI training practices. For example, although Anthropic says: “We don’t train on your data by default on our Team and Enterprise Plans”, some critics have highlighted how the company’s Pro and Max plans appear to operate differently under default settings unless users manually opt out of data usage for model improvement.

Anthropic’s own privacy wording for those plans states: “We will use your chats and coding sessions (including to improve our models).”

The company also notes that while raw connector data is not directly used for training, information copied into conversations with Claude may potentially become part of model improvement processes depending on account settings.

That distinction matters because many small businesses may not fully understand the differences between plan tiers, connector permissions, data flows, and AI training policies when deploying these systems across sensitive operational workflows.

Why This Matters

The wider significance of the launch goes far beyond Anthropic itself. The real story is that AI companies are now aggressively targeting the huge middle ground between enterprise software and ordinary consumer tools.

For example, rather than simply selling AI only to large corporations with dedicated implementation teams, firms like Anthropic increasingly want AI embedded directly into the everyday software stacks used by smaller businesses.

This could eventually allow small firms to automate tasks that previously required multiple staff, external agencies, or expensive specialist software.

Also, it increases the importance of understanding exactly how business data is being processed, stored, connected, and potentially reused by AI providers.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For businesses, Anthropic’s announcement is another sign that AI tools are rapidly becoming more operational, connected, and workflow-driven rather than simply conversational.

The appeal is obvious. Smaller companies are constantly under pressure to manage administration, finance, marketing, customer service, and compliance with limited staff and budgets. AI systems capable of handling parts of those repetitive workflows could potentially save significant time, reduce operational costs, and lessen the need for additional administrative headcount or outsourced support.

However, the launch also highlights the need for businesses to examine AI governance carefully before connecting sensitive financial, customer, and operational systems into external AI platforms.

As the technology itself becomes increasingly accessible to smaller businesses, understanding the privacy, control, and data implications is now becoming just as important as understanding the AI tools themselves.

Sustainability-In-Tech : Why IT Companies Are Relocating To Texas

Posted on by Paul Stradling

Texas is becoming America’s top destination for technology companies, but the same policies attracting them are driving an energy boom that threatens to undo key environmental gains.

What Is Driving The Move?

Over the past five years, Texas has led the United States in corporate relocations. For example, as research from CBRE shows, since 2018, 465 company headquarters have moved states, with 209 choosing Texas. Firms ranging from Oracle and Hewlett Packard Enterprise to Tesla and GAF Energy have made the jump, citing lower costs, fewer regulations, and access to talent.

Unlike California, Texas has no corporate or personal income tax, fewer environmental restrictions, and a comparatively low cost of living. The Dallas–Fort Worth region now ranks among the fastest-growing business hubs in the world, offering an international airport network and a deepening talent pool supported by major universities. For many technology companies struggling with California’s high energy prices and stricter labour laws, the switch appears to make economic sense.

The Case Of GAF Energy

One clear example came this month (October 2025) when GAF Energy, a solar shingle manufacturer, confirmed it would close its San Jose site and move operations to Georgetown, Texas, cutting 138 jobs in the Bay Area. The company said it was aligning its business with markets where solar is most compelling for builders and homeowners.

California’s recent cuts to solar subsidies and tightening regulation have made it harder for solar installers to maintain margins. Texas, by contrast, offers an expanding housing market, lower costs, and an open regulatory environment. The relocation follows similar moves by major names such as Oracle, Verily Life Sciences, Realtor.com, and Tesla, each seeking the same business-friendly advantages.

Energy, Power, And Expansion

Energy reliability and price are the key factors at the heart of Texas’s appeal. For example, the state produces more electricity than any other, driven by a mix of natural gas, wind, and increasingly, solar power. Data from the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) shows electricity demand could almost double by 2034, with half of all new industrial demand expected to come from data centres.

These facilities, which host servers for artificial intelligence (AI), cryptocurrency, and cloud computing, require enormous and continuous energy supplies. Texas is one of the few places capable of meeting this demand at scale. Its grid is largely self-contained, allowing developers to negotiate directly with utilities and local governments for new capacity.

For example, Cognigy, a Germany-based AI firm, announced earlier this year that it would relocate its US headquarters from San Francisco to Plano, north of Dallas, citing Texas’s business-friendly environment and access to talent. The company says it plans to grow its workforce to 200 within three years.

The Cost Of Growth

However, it should be noted here that the same power abundance that draws IT firms is driving a rapid buildout of fossil-fuel generation. For example, according to the Environmental Integrity Project, developers have announced 130 new natural gas power plants in Texas, capable of producing 58 gigawatts of electricity, which is enough to power more than 14 million homes.

If all are built, the clear downside is that they could emit 115 million metric tonnes of greenhouse gases each year, equivalent to the annual emissions of nearly 30 coal-fired plants or 27 million vehicles. Many of these projects are being approved under what campaigners call weakened permits, allowing construction to proceed more quickly but with fewer pollution controls.

Environmental groups argue that some applications are being approved in record time, sometimes within days of filing. They have urged the Environmental Protection Agency to intervene, warning that this pace risks breaching clean air standards.

The Trump Factor

It’s impossible to ignore the fact that President Donald Trump’s new energy policies are helping to drive this expansion. For example, in May 2025, he signed four executive orders aimed at dramatically increasing US nuclear capacity and accelerating fossil fuel permitting. One order instructs the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to cut licensing timelines to 18 months. Another sets a long-term goal of adding between 300 and 400 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050.

Supporters argue that Trump’s plan will strengthen energy independence and support power-hungry sectors such as AI and manufacturing. Critics, however, note that it has come alongside funding cuts for renewables. Federal incentives for solar and wind have been reduced, while the Texas Energy Fund, backed by up to $7.2 billion in taxpayer loans and grants, excludes renewable projects from receiving support.

The Rise Of The “Trump Energy Campus”

Perhaps the most striking example of this change is Fermi America’s proposed “President Donald J. Trump Advanced Energy and Intelligence Campus” near Amarillo. The project, co-founded by former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, would combine four Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactors with one of the largest gas-fired plants in the country to power an 18 million square foot data centre.

Fermi claims the combined “hypergrid” could generate up to 11 gigawatts of electricity, roughly equal to the entire output of Manhattan. However, local residents and environmental groups are questioning how it will secure enough cooling water in a drought-prone area that receives only around 20 inches of rain per year.

Officials have suggested that treated wastewater from a nearby nuclear weapons facility could be used, though some farmers remain concerned about groundwater depletion. Others have noted that the site sits near a long-standing Superfund cleanup zone, raising questions about environmental safety and oversight.

Air Quality And Water Pressure

Beyond the carbon emissions, new power plants are expected to worsen local air quality. For example, gas facilities release nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, and fine particulate matter that can trigger asthma and heart disease. Fourteen of the 54 planned sites are located in areas already failing to meet national air-quality standards for ozone and particulate matter.

Water scarcity is another well-documented and growing concern. For example, some large-scale data centres can use millions of litres of water per day for cooling. However, Texas has no statewide requirement for companies to report their consumption, making it difficult to track the full environmental impact of the sector’s expansion. Analysts warn that unchecked data-centre growth could strain local water supplies, particularly across central and western Texas.

A Balancing Act Between Growth And Sustainability

For now, it’s obvious why Texas is so appealing to the tech sector. Low taxes, vast land, and abundant power have created a pro-business environment that few other states can match. However, the state’s heavy reliance on gas-fired power and the water-intensive nature of data-centre development are creating a sustainability paradox.

ERCOT’s chief executive, Pablo Vegas, has publicly stated that treating renewables as a problem is misleading and that Texas’s long-term energy stability depends on keeping a balanced mix of energy sources. His comments reflect a wider recognition that growth built solely on fossil generation could expose the grid to both environmental and operational risk.

Why This Matters Beyond Texas

For UK and European businesses with operations or supply-chain links in the US, these developments matter. Texas’s growing dominance as a technology and manufacturing hub is reshaping the energy and sustainability landscape that underpins global digital infrastructure. The tension between low-cost growth and long-term environmental responsibility is likely to define how the next decade of US industrial policy unfolds.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

What is happening in Texas is a clear example of the tension between economic opportunity and environmental responsibility. The state’s low costs, deregulated markets, and vast energy resources have created a magnet for technology investment, yet this same combination risks locking the region into higher emissions and heavier water use at a time when sustainability should be at the centre of long-term planning.

The growth of data centres and AI facilities will almost certainly strengthen Texas’s position as a global digital hub, but their reliance on fossil-fuel power could undermine both state and national climate targets. For UK companies supplying technology, engineering, or energy solutions into the US market, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. Those offering cleaner technologies, efficient cooling systems, or renewable integration expertise may find growing demand as American firms face pressure to offset their environmental impact.

The state’s current approach also offers a wider lesson for policymakers and corporate leaders. Economic incentives alone cannot deliver a sustainable industrial future unless they are balanced with transparency, environmental safeguards, and credible emissions reductions. If Texas manages to align its economic momentum with clean energy growth, it could become a model for responsible expansion. If it fails, it risks becoming a cautionary tale of unchecked development driven by short-term gains.

For investors, regulators, and businesses alike, the outcome will be significant. The decisions being made in Texas today will shape the carbon footprint of the next generation of global technology infrastructure, influencing where companies build, how they power their operations, and how international partners view the sustainability of America’s digital economy.

Featured Article : US & UK Public Sectors Running Insecure IT

Posted on by Paul Stradling

A major new study has revealed that 78 per cent of (US) public sector organisations are still operating with serious, unresolved software security flaws, some of which have persisted for over five years.

Report Uncovers Widespread “Security Debt”

The findings come from US-based application risk management firm Veracode’s Public Sector State of Software Security 2025 report, released on 11 June. Based on an analysis of over 1.3 million software applications and 126 million security findings, the research highlights the extent to which government organisations in the US are falling behind on basic software vulnerability management.

According to the report, a massive 78 per cent of (US) public sector bodies are running with unresolved flaws that have remained open for more than a year, a situation Veracode refers to as “security debt”. In more than half of these organisations, the report identifies critical vulnerabilities with high risk potential that have still not been addressed.

Fixing Flaws Takes Far Longer in Government

One of the clearest indicators of the public sector’s struggle appears to be the time it takes to resolve these software issues. For example, the report shows that government bodies take an average of 315 days to fix just half of their identified software vulnerabilities. This is far higher than the cross-industry average of 252 days, which is already considered too slow by many cybersecurity experts.

That 63-day gap may sound modest, but Veracode warns it opens up a significant attack window. This is because these flaws, often in applications delivering essential services, could be exploited by attackers for months at a time. In some cases, flaws are left unresolved for multiple years. As the report shows, around one-third of vulnerabilities in US government software remain unpatched even after two years, and 15 per cent are still unresolved after five.

Chris Wysopal, Chief Security Evangelist at Veracode, described the situation as a systemic failure to keep pace with risk, saying: “Many government organisations are facing growing challenges in keeping up with vulnerability remediation, potentially leaving critical systems and data that run essential government services exposed.”

Which Public Sector Organisations?

The report encompasses a wide range of public sector bodies, including US federal, regional, and local government departments, as well as agencies responsible for education, healthcare, law enforcement, and infrastructure. While the specific organisations are not named, the findings indicate a sector-wide problem that spans multiple tiers of government.

Public-facing applications and internal administrative systems are both affected, with legacy software and fragmented IT infrastructure frequently cited as contributing factors. The report also shows that larger and more complex organisations tend to perform worse, particularly where digital transformation has lagged.

Is the UK Public Sector Facing the Same Risks?

Although Veracode’s report focuses specifically on the US, many of the challenges it identifies appear to be mirrored in the UK.

For example, according to a recent National Audit Office (NAO) report, 58 critical UK government IT systems still have significant cyber-resilience gaps, with 228 legacy systems running without full knowledge of their vulnerabilities. The NAO also highlighted that one in three cybersecurity roles in government remains vacant or is filled by temporary staff, suggesting a widespread skills shortage similar to that seen in the US.

Also, recent cyber incidents have highlighted the risks. For example, back in May, a breach at the Legal Aid Agency exposed the personal data of over 2 million individuals. The British Library and parts of the NHS have also suffered serious service disruptions due to ransomware attacks, often linked to outdated infrastructure.

Unlike Veracode’s report, there is currently no published UK data showing the average time it takes public sector bodies to fix software vulnerabilities. However, the reliance on legacy systems, combined with under-resourced security teams and a reactive approach to patching, strongly suggests that vulnerability resolution timelines in the UK are also prolonged.

That said, the UK Government has begun taking steps to address the issue. For example, a new Cyber Security and Resilience Bill is set to tighten breach reporting requirements and enhance supply chain security. Also, the NCSC’s GovAssure programme is now auditing critical departments, and £1 billion has been pledged to improve cyber capacity across public services. However, progress has been slow, and experts have raised concerns about how effectively these initiatives are being implemented.

In the absence of specific figures, it remains difficult to compare the scale of UK security debt directly with the US, however the warning signs are there and the structural issues look strikingly familiar.

Open Source and Third-Party Code a Major Weak Point

While most flaws are found in first-party applications, it seems that the most dangerous and persistent problems come from open-source and third-party code. Interestingly, although these components make up less than 10 per cent of total public sector software, they account for 70 per cent of the critical security debt in government systems.

To make matters worse, flaws in third-party code take around 50 per cent longer to fix than those in software developed internally. As organisations increasingly rely on open-source libraries and packages, this gap presents a growing threat.

“This disproportionate risk highlights the importance of securing software supply chains and carefully vetting open-source dependencies,” said Wysopal. “Without extending visibility and remediation efforts beyond internal code, public sector entities risk leaving the most dangerous flaws unaddressed.”

Some Agencies Are Far Ahead of Others

The report appears to highlight a stark disparity between the best and worst performing organisations. In the top 25 per cent of public sector bodies, just one-third of applications contain flaws. These leading agencies resolve half of their issues within 3.3 months and manage to fix over 9 per cent of flaws per month. The report shows that by contrast, the worst 25 per cent have flaws in every application tested, with less than 0.1 per cent fixed each month and average remediation times exceeding 11 months.

Wysopal highlights how this gap raises serious questions about leadership, resource allocation, and operational culture across the public sector, saying: “The disparity between top and bottom-performing government organisations is striking and raises important questions about the factors that make a material difference to security posture.”

What’s Causing the Problem?

The report suggests a number of causes behind the growing backlog. These include underinvestment in software development security (AppSec) tools, overreliance on legacy systems, and a lack of skilled personnel to address vulnerabilities at scale.

Another issue is that vulnerability scanning is often performed late in the development lifecycle, when flaws are more costly and time-consuming to fix. Without ongoing analysis and integration into development workflows, issues tend to accumulate and are eventually deprioritised due to competing pressures.

Compounding this appears to be the rapid adoption of AI-generated code. While generative AI can speed up development, it can also introduce subtle but serious vulnerabilities if not properly reviewed. Veracode warns that comprehensive open-source analysis is more essential than ever to prevent hidden flaws from slipping through.

How Can Public Sector Bodies Respond?

Veracode is urging public sector organisations to modernise their approach by adopting risk-based remediation strategies and automating more of the security process. Key recommendations include:

– Implementing context-driven security posture management, which prioritises the most exploitable vulnerabilities using insights from multiple tools and data sources.

– Establishing continuous scanning, integrated into the full development lifecycle, so that flaws are caught earlier and fixed faster.

– Supporting developer enablement, giving teams the training and tools they need to identify and address issues proactively.

According to the report, the most effective and cost-efficient way to reduce security debt is to prevent it from accumulating in the first place.

Risks for the Public, Service Delivery, and Compliance

While the problem is technical in nature, the impact appears to extend far beyond IT departments. For example, vulnerabilities in public sector software can put sensitive public data at risk, disrupt essential services, and erode public trust. In sectors like healthcare and social services, the consequences of a breach could be devastating.

There are also compliance implications. For example, governments are increasingly subject to cybersecurity regulations requiring evidence of secure coding practices and risk mitigation. Persistent security debt may put some organisations in breach of data protection obligations or national security protocols.

A Complex Challenge, but Improvement Is Possible

Despite the bleak statistics, Veracode’s analysis makes clear that progress is achievable and that top-performing agencies prove that meaningful improvement can be made with the right strategy, investment, and organisational buy-in.

The challenge now appears to be for lagging organisations to assess their security maturity, identify the operational and cultural blockers to faster remediation, and make the structural changes needed to reduce their exposure to risk.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For governments, the consequences of inaction are no longer theoretical. The exposure created by slow patching and ageing systems is already being exploited by cybercriminals. Also, for the public, the stakes are growing, whether through data loss, service disruption, or erosion of trust in digital government services. What Veracode’s report makes clear is that the organisations getting this right are not doing so through luck or scale, but through deliberate prioritisation and operational focus.

In the UK, many of the same systemic issues are clearly visible. Critical infrastructure is still running on unsupported legacy platforms, key security roles remain unfilled, and cyber incidents linked to outdated systems are becoming more frequent. Without hard data on vulnerability resolution times or the extent of open-source debt, public sector bodies are left guessing where their greatest risks lie and how they compare to their peers.

This gap also affects the wider network of software vendors and contractors. UK businesses that supply the public sector will need to meet rising expectations around security assurance and may face tighter scrutiny as new legislation and procurement rules come into force. At the same time, private sector organisations can use these findings as a benchmark, both to avoid the same mistakes and to identify opportunities to lead in secure development practices.

The core message here is that software risk is measurable, manageable, and no longer optional. Delays in addressing known flaws are not just a technical lapse but an operational liability, with real consequences for services, compliance, and reputation. Whether in the US or UK, the longer these gaps are left open, the harder and costlier they become to close.

Featured Article : Banks to Pay Millions After IT Failures Leave Customers Stranded

Posted on by Paul Stradling

UK banking customers who have faced repeated IT failures are set to receive millions in compensation, following a damning Treasury Committee investigation into the scale and impact of these outages.

Nine Banks

The inquiry revealed that in the past two years alone, nine major banks and building societies have suffered more than a month’s worth of system failures, leaving millions unable to access their money when they needed it most.

How Big Is The Problem?

The inquiry revealed that between January 2023 and February 2025, major high street banks (including Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, Nationwide, Santander, and NatWest) collectively experienced at least 803 hours of IT outages. That’s more than 33 days of service disruptions, affecting customers’ ability to make payments, transfer funds, and in some cases, even access their own accounts.

To make matters worse, some of the most disruptive outages occurred on key dates, including payday, adding to the distress caused. For many, these incidents resulted in late bill payments, missed wages, and even the inability to complete major transactions – a situation that has been described as ‘deeply unsettling’ by campaigners.

Many Living Pay Cheque to Pay Cheque

Commenting on the findings of the report, Dame Meg Hillier, Chair of the Treasury Committee, did not hold back in her criticism of the situation, stating: “For families and individuals living pay cheque to pay cheque, losing access to banking services on payday can be a terrifying experience. The fact there has been enough outages to fill a whole month within the last two years shows customers’ frustrations are completely valid.”

Which Banks Are Paying Out and How Much?

As scrutiny on the sector intensifies, it seems that some banks have now set aside millions to compensate affected customers. Here’s what each bank is paying and why:

– Barclays… The worst-hit bank in the report, Barclays is expected to pay between £5 million and £7.5 million for inconvenience and distress caused by various outages, with the total amounting to £12.5 million over the past two years.

– Bank of Ireland… The second-largest compensation payout, with £350,000 being distributed to impacted customers.

– NatWest… Has recorded 13 major incidents and will be compensating customers £348,000.

– HSBC… With 32 separate IT failures, HSBC has set aside £232,697 in compensation payments.

– Lloyds… Customers will receive £160,000 following 12 incidents of service disruption.

– Nationwide… The building society has paid out £77,452 due to system failures.

– Santander… Despite 24 incidents, its compensation stands at just £17,000.

– AIB… Paying out a nominal £590 in compensation.

The scale of Barclays’ payout alone shows the gravity of the problem, particularly given that its most recent failure in January left 56 per cent of online payments failing on payday, with some customers unable to complete house moves and others left stranded without funds.

What It Could Mean for Customers

For banking customers, these payouts are likely to come as both a relief and a frustration. For example, while the compensation acknowledges the distress caused, it’s likely to do little to restore confidence in the reliability of banking services. Many customers have already expressed concerns that IT failures are becoming more frequent, rather than less, despite advances in technology.

Although the payouts may be welcomed, customers will still be aware that unless something is done about the failing IT systems from underlying legacy banking infrastructure that keeps crashing, they’re still at risk of it happening again.

Unclear How to Claim Compensation

While Barclays and others have vowed that no customer will be left out of pocket, the process of claiming compensation still remains unclear for many. Some have already lodged formal complaints, while others may need to wait for banks to proactively contact them about payments.

The Wider Impact on the Banking Industry

This wave of IT failures, and the subsequent compensation payouts, has put the UK banking industry under renewed pressure to modernise its digital infrastructure. Thankfully, the Treasury Committee has made it clear that more needs to be done to reduce the frequency of these failures, and banks are now being urged to make urgent investments in:

– IT resilience – ensuring systems are robust enough to handle peak usage periods.

– Third-party oversight – many failures stem from external suppliers, raising questions about regulation.

– Customer communication – better transparency when outages occur and clearer processes for compensation.

The government has already hinted that further regulation may be on the horizon, with a Treasury spokesperson stating: “We are working with the financial authorities to regulate third-party suppliers, as well as considering whether the banks are doing all they can to provide the level of service customers expect.”

What Does This Mean for Your Business?

The banks now find themselves at a crossroads. While the compensation payments acknowledge the impact on customers, they do not solve the deeper issue of unreliable IT infrastructure. For customers, the payouts may soften the blow, but they will do little to restore long-term confidence unless meaningful action is taken to prevent future disruptions.

For businesses, the implications of these failures are always far-reaching. For example, many companies rely on seamless banking operations to pay staff, manage cash flow, and complete critical transactions. Therefore, when banking systems go down, the knock-on effects can be severe, potentially leading to delayed wages, operational disruptions, and financial uncertainty. Small businesses, in particular, can struggle to absorb these setbacks, making banking reliability an essential component of economic stability.

The industry’s response to this crisis will shape the future of banking in the UK. If banks commit to modernising their IT systems and prioritising customer service, they may yet rebuild trust. However, continued failures could prompt stricter regulatory intervention, higher penalties, and increased competition from digital-only banks that have so far proven more resilient. With technology at the heart of modern finance, institutions that fail to adapt may find themselves losing not just customers, but also their position in the market.

As pressure mounts, it seems that banking in the UK is at a kind of turning point, and the coming months will determine whether these institutions can step up to meet the expectations of the businesses and individuals who depend on them every day.

Sustainability-In-Tech : IT Channel Increasingly Shifting to Carbon Reduction

Posted on by Paul Stradling

New research indicates that sustainability is now a defining issue in the IT channel, with businesses increasingly focusing on reducing carbon emissions rather than relying on offsetting.

Sustainability Rises Back Up the Agenda

The new research from Agilitas IT Solutions, conducted in partnership with Censuswide, highlights a renewed commitment to sustainability, as companies seek to align environmental responsibility with operational efficiency and cost savings. The “Channel Trends: Sustainability: An Urgent Imperative” 2025 report appears to show the growing prioritisation of sustainability among UK-based channel businesses with annual revenues exceeding £5 million. The study highlighted in the report, which surveyed 250 key industry figures, found that three-quarters of respondents rated sustainability at least 7 out of 10 in importance. Notably, 39 per cent of businesses saw sustainability as a key focus area, scoring 9 or 10 out of a maximum 10.

Rebound But Disparity

While this remains below the peak score of 7.8 recorded in 2021, it seems to represent a welcome rebound from the decline seen in 2022 and 2023. Despite this, the survey also exposed a striking disparity in sustainability engagement across different levels of seniority. For example, just 8 per cent of junior managers consider it a top priority, in contrast to more than half of CEOs and business owners. Among senior managers, 34 per cent expressed confidence in their organisation’s sustainable practices, while 37 per cent of CEOs said they were optimistic about their company’s sustainability efforts.

Sara Wilkes, CEO of Agilitas, points to the need for better alignment within organisations, saying: “While business leaders are focused on sustainability goals, there is a notable disconnect across organisations which needs to be addressed in order to create a culture of collaboration and innovation.”

Moving from Offsetting to Carbon Reduction

One of the most notable shifts in the IT channel’s approach to sustainability, highlighted by the research, is the move away from carbon offsetting towards reduction strategies. For example, in 2022, a third of surveyed businesses were investing in offsetting schemes, but today, less than a quarter are following that route. Instead, firms are prioritising direct reductions in emissions and operational efficiencies that not only help the planet but also cut costs.

Among those already taking action, 36 per cent have implemented reduction-based initiatives, focusing on:

– Improving energy efficiency

– Streamlining business processes

– Adopting remote and hybrid working models

– Partnering with environmentally responsible suppliers

Also, a further 37 per cent of businesses say they plan to roll out reduction strategies over the next year, although more than a quarter admit they have no immediate plans to prioritise carbon reduction.

Commenting on the study’s findings, Deborah Johnson, Head of ESG at Agilitas, has reinforced the importance of carbon reduction over offsetting, stating: “Carbon offsetting, whilst useful in balancing emissions, does not address the underlying issue. Whilst investing in projects that absorb or remove carbon are still good things to do, it’s great to see the switch to carbon reduction strategies that focus on directly reducing the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere from a business’ own operations.”

Challenges in Sustainability Reporting and Transparency

One of the biggest barriers to sustainability progress in the IT channel is the complexity of tracking and reporting emissions, particularly Scope 3 emissions, which encompass the entire supply chain. Businesses are under increasing pressure to collect accurate data and report their progress transparently, not only to comply with regulations but also to meet customers’ growing sustainability expectations.

According to the report, 21 per cent of respondents calculated their carbon footprint across Scope 1 and 2, while only 19 per cent accounted for all three scopes, suggesting that 60 per cent of the channel is not aligning sustainability reporting with the GHG Protocol.

Agilitas CEO Wilkes has highlighted the importance of high-quality data collection, saying: “Ensuring data is accurate, well-logged and reviewed regularly is just the first step. Our Channel Trends report aims to help businesses integrate sustainability into their long-term strategies, both now and in the future.”

The Role of Partnerships in Sustainability

Collaboration appears to be a key driver of sustainability progress in the IT channel. By sharing resources, knowledge, and solutions, companies can work together to reduce supply chain emissions, improve energy efficiency, and embed circular economy principles into their operations.

As highlighted by Lee Ellams, Head of Marketing at a UK-based IT services and solutions provider Tieva: “Partnerships are key to sustainability in the IT Channel, enabling companies to share resources, knowledge, and solutions. Together, they can tackle supply chain emissions, boost energy efficiency, and promote circular economy practices.”

This sentiment has also been echoed by Agilitas IT Solutions, saying: “By working together, channel partners can share best practices, leverage cutting-edge technology, and create truly sustainable supply chains that benefit both the industry and the environment.”

Balancing Sustainability with Business Growth

While sustainability is increasingly recognised as a key business priority, many companies still face the challenge of balancing environmental goals with commercial pressures. With economic uncertainty and rising costs impacting decision-making, some organisations are hesitant to invest in sustainability measures that do not deliver immediate financial returns.

However, many industry experts argue that sustainability and profitability are not mutually exclusive. A well-executed sustainability strategy can help businesses reduce operational costs, enhance brand reputation, and attract environmentally conscious customers. For example, as Sara Wilkes says: “Sustainability isn’t just about compliance or reputation; it’s about resilience. Companies that embrace sustainability will be better positioned for long-term growth and success.”

Consensus?

Other recent industry reports appear to align with Agilitas’s findings, emphasising a growing commitment to sustainability within the IT sector. For example, Deloitte’s 2024 Sustainability Action Report highlights that both public and private US companies are increasingly integrating Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) measures into their operations, viewing them as beneficial for long-term success.

Similarly, Capgemini’s 2024 sustainability trends report highlights the importance of climate technologies, such as low-carbon hydrogen and industrial carbon capture, in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The report notes that two-thirds of executives believe data and digital technologies accelerate the adoption of these climate solutions, despite challenges like high costs and regulatory uncertainties.

A recent analysis by global sustainability consultancy ERM identifies decarbonisation as a critical focus, with stakeholders pushing for more aggressive emission reduction strategies. The report also highlights the need for streamlined sustainability disclosures and the development of sustainable, transparent supply chains.

It seems, therefore, that there is a kind of consensus within the industry on the importance of moving beyond carbon offsetting to implement tangible carbon reduction strategies, aligning with Agilitas’s findings.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

The research from Agilitas IT Solutions does appear to highlight a crucial shift in the IT channel’s approach to sustainability, i.e. one that moves beyond carbon offsetting towards genuine reduction strategies. While offsetting has long been seen as a convenient means of mitigating environmental impact, the industry is increasingly recognising that it does little to address the root causes of emissions. Instead, businesses are turning to proactive measures such as improving energy efficiency, refining supply chains, and adopting new operational models that directly lower their carbon footprint.

However, despite this positive momentum, the findings also highlight a disparity in engagement across different levels of seniority, with business leaders more invested in sustainability than junior managers. This disconnect suggests that while sustainability is now firmly embedded in strategic discussions, translating that commitment into organisation-wide cultural change remains a challenge. Without clear alignment across all levels of an organisation, sustainability efforts risk becoming fragmented or failing to deliver their full potential.

Another critical barrier to progress is the complexity of emissions tracking and reporting, particularly when it comes to Scope 3 emissions i.e., emissions from a company’s value chain, including suppliers, product usage, and transportation. The research indicates that a significant portion of the IT channel is still struggling to meet reporting standards such as the GHG Protocol. Without accurate data and transparent disclosure, businesses may find it difficult to demonstrate real progress or build trust with stakeholders. However, the increasing emphasis on collaboration through partnerships, shared best practices, and collective industry efforts suggests that companies are recognising the need to work together to overcome these challenges.

While commercial pressures remain, there is, therefore, growing evidence that sustainability and business growth are not mutually exclusive. Companies that integrate environmental responsibility into their long-term strategies should stand to benefit not only from cost efficiencies but also from enhanced brand reputation, regulatory compliance, and increased customer loyalty. The findings of the Agilitas report, alongside those of other recent industry analyses, suggest a broader consensus that real carbon reduction, not mere offsetting, is the path forward. The IT channel may be making progress, but continued commitment, collaboration, and clear measurement will be key to ensuring that sustainability remains more than just a stated priority and becomes an embedded reality.

Tech Insight : ‘Only’ Double IT Spending Growth (To $5 Trillion)

Posted on by Paul Stradling

New research from Gartner has predicted that global IT spending this year will reach $5 trillion and IT spending growth will be more than double that of 2023.

A First – Spending More On IT Than Communications 

In its IT spending forecast, Gartner predicts that the massive $5 trillion global spend means that spending on IT services will surpass communications services spending for the first time.

Spending Growth More Than Double 

Another standout figure from the forecast is that the IT spending growth rate of 6.8 per cent in 2024 will be more than double that of the 3.3 per rate in 2023. These key spending and growth figures (even though the 6.8 figure is less than the 8 per cent forecasted the previous quarter) indicate that despite fears of a slowing IT sector, things are very much looking up for the year ahead.

The Largest Spending Segment 

In fact, Gartner forecasts that with spending on IT services is expected to grow 8.7 per cent this year in 2024, reaching $1.5 trillion, IT services spending will become the largest segment of IT spending, even above that of the communications and software sectors.

Gartner says the reason for this IT services growth is mainly due to enterprises investing in organisational efficiency and optimisation projects as these types of investments could be crucial during this period of economic uncertainty.

For example, as John-David Lovelock, VP Analyst at Gartner explains it: “Adoption rates among consumers for devices and communications services plateaued over a decade ago. Consumer spending levels are primarily driven by price changes and replacement cycles, leaving room for only incremental growths, so being surpassed by software and services was inevitable.” 

What About AI?

Although generative AI is essentially the next industrial revolution, it is still relatively new and hasn’t made much impact on near-term IT spending. Gartner suggests that the reason for this is that it “blindsided organisations and boards,” meaning that CIOs are being cautious with their spending.

Therefore, it’s likely that 2024 will be the year of planning for Generative AI, but IT spending will be driven by more traditional forces e.g., profitability, labour, and “a wave of change fatigue”. 

What Is ‘Change Fatigue’ ? 

Change fatigue refers to the resistance or passive resignation that employees may feel towards organisational changes, leading to symptoms such as apathy, resistance, passive resignation, frustration, and burnout.

The thinking is that pandemic-related disruption to work in recent years, combined with factors like turbulent economic conditions, rapid digitisation, and the sheer volume of changes have led to employees’ ability to cope with change dropping to 50 per cent of pre-pandemic levels.

Gartner attributes the fact that the overall IT spending growth rate for 2023 was 3.3 per cent, only a 0.3 per cent increase from 2022 to “fatigue among CIOs”. 

Could Lead To Change Resistance 

It is thought that one of the effects of change fatigue is that it could have a negative effect on IT spending by causing “change resistance” among CIOs, i.e. CIOs hesitating to sign new contracts or to commit to long-term initiatives, or to take on new technology partners. This change fatigue and resistance may mean that CIOs will be looking for higher levels of risk mitigation and greater certainty of outcomes before committing to new initiatives.

MSP Budgets Up Due To Surging Demand 

Another indicator of a healthy IT sector in 2024 is given by new research from ETB Technologies which shows that MSP budgets are up a massive 70 per cent due to surging enterprise demand. The research, based on the answers of 250 leading MSP figures on current trends around spending, found that 80 per cent have increased their spending and 67 per cent have doubled their budget size.

The research attributes these figures to the impact of world events in recent years, e.g. the pandemic, Brexit, geopolitical and economic turbulence, climate change, and supply chain disruptions, leading to an “almost universal shift” towards a hybrid cloud-based strategy. This type of cloud strategy is where an organisation uses a mix of on-premises, private cloud, and public cloud services with orchestration between the platforms. This is likely to be more preferred in these uncertain times because it allows businesses to balance the need for security and control with the flexibility and scalability of cloud services (and it’s cost effective).

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

As highlighted in Gartner’s forecast, although the IT sector has a healthy outlook with a doubling of growth in the IT spending rate, economic uncertainty is leading to enterprises investing in organisational efficiency and optimisation projects. This, in turn, is one of the main reasons why IT services spending is set to surge this year (higher than communications spending). Although the AI revolution is bringing massive change, it seems the fact that it may have ‘blindsided’ CIOs means that it won’t account for a large amount of IT spending this year, but 2024 will be a year for AI planning instead. This means that IT spending in 2024 will be driven by more traditional forces.

However, the issue of change fatigue among IT spending decision-makers does look set to make them more cautious and could have a downward effect on IT spending this year. This could mean that organisations need to work on trying to understand the factors contributing to change fatigue and employing targeted strategies to help alleviate the adverse effects. On the upside in the world of MSPs, surging demand for hybrid cloud-based solutions is necessitating major increases in budgets and spending.

Overall, 2024 looks like becoming a good year for IT services spending and although the AI revolution is here, we’re still more at the planning than spending stage, so it’s a case of waiting a little longer before AI makes a major impact in spending figures.

Tech News : Autumn Statement Suggests IT Spending Boost

Posted on by Paul Stradling

The announcement of measures intended to boost investment in innovation and technology in UK Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s Autumn Statement could mean increased spending on IT and AI.

Measures To Boost The Tech Sector

The UK Chancellor’s Autumn Statement introduced a range of measures aimed at boosting the tech sector, with potentially significant implications for tech spending and investment in innovation. Some tech commentators have suggested that this could mean that private-sector IT buyers will see a long-term boost. Here we take a look at how the measures announced could affect tech spending, their potential overall impact, and any negative effects they might have.

Positive Impacts on Tech Spending 

Some of the key announcements in the Autumn Statement that could have a positive effect on tech spending include :

– A permanent full expensing policy. Mr Hunt’s decision to make the full expensing policy permanent allows private sector IT buyers to write off the cost of IT equipment against tax. This policy, therefore, looks likely to encourage more investment in IT infrastructure, as companies can deduct these expenses from taxable profits.

– Enhanced R&D tax credits. The merger of the R&D Expenditure Credit and SME schemes from April 2024 will make more companies eligible for claims supporting innovation. It’s thought that around 5,000 additional small businesses may benefit, thereby helping to foster a more innovative environment in the UK tech sector.

– Investment in AI and quantum technologies. The government’s commitment of £500 million over two years to establish additional ‘compute innovation centres’ and the funding being part of a larger £1.5 billion investment is intended to enhance the UK’s capabilities in AI. The Statement also outlined five quantum missions as part of the ‘National Quantum Strategy.’ These missions focus on establishing advanced quantum computing capabilities and networks and incorporating quantum technologies in various sectors such as healthcare, transportation, and defence by 2030 and 2035. One key benefit of quantum computing being made available to healthcare could of course be breakthroughs in areas like drug discovery. Thinking back to the pandemic, many peopel may remember how quantum computing was something that was being used to help speed the way to developing effective vaccines.

– Skills development Initiatives. It’s long been known that the UK has a tech skills gap which is something that threatens to hamper its ambition to become an international technology superpower. Therefore, a £50 million investment to pilot ways to increase apprenticeships in key growth sectors (including engineering) aligns with the need for a skilled workforce to sustain tech advancements. Mr Hunt also announced three more investment zones (on top of the 12 announced in March) in order to boost advanced manufacturing in the West Midlands, East Midlands, and Greater Manchester.

– Support for clean energy and infrastructure. The outlined efforts to cut grid access delays and provide financial incentives for clean energy businesses will likely accelerate the UK’s transition to a low-carbon economy, benefiting green tech initiatives. For example, a £960m Green Industries Growth Accelerator fund may help to support emerging technologies in clean energy and the transition to net-zero.

Not All Positive 

Some of the Autumn Statement announcements, however, may not be such good news for the UK’s tech sector. For example, some of the potential challenges and negative effects include:

– Negative economic forecasts and tight public spending: Despite some of the ambitious measures announced, their success is essentially contingent on economic forecasts, which are currently revised downwards. A significant squeeze on public spending due to inflation may also hamper the plans for digital transformation, especially if budget constraints affect public sector investments.

– Implementation and collaboration needs. The effectiveness of the many potentially positive measures announced depends on the government’s ability to implement them quickly and efficiently. Also, government collaboration with the tech sector is crucial to ensure these policies translate into tangible growth and innovation. For example, the government will need to work alongside tech companies, startups, and industry experts to understand their needs, address potential challenges, and ensure that the policies are actually practical and beneficial.

– A reliance on estimates and uncertainties. Some reforms, like those to the energy grid and pension and capital market reforms, are unfortunately based on estimates that may not actually materialise as expected. If these projections fall short, it could limit the overall impact of the statement’s measures on tech investment and growth.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The Autumn Statement’s initiatives offer a promising landscape for businesses beyond just IT buyers, possibly signalling a transformative shift in the UK’s approach to technological advancement and innovation. The decision to make full expensing permanent, coupled with enhanced R&D tax credits, may help present a financially viable path for businesses across various sectors to invest more boldly in new technology and innovation projects. This change not only eases the financial burden of such investments but may also go some way to encouraging a culture of continuous innovation.

The substantial investments in AI, quantum computing, and compute infrastructure could open up new avenues for businesses to access and leverage advanced technologies. These technologies, for example, have the potential to revolutionise product development and operational efficiency across a wide range of industries. As a result, organisations can look forward to not only improved business-processes but also the possibility of developing groundbreaking new products and services.

The focus on developing much-needed tech skills in the UK workforce through apprenticeships and training initiatives is another critical aspect. This approach could help give UK businesses access to employees equipped with the necessary skills to navigate and contribute to an increasingly complex technological landscape. This is particularly crucial at a time when technology is evolving rapidly, and the demand for skilled professionals is at an all-time high.

Businesses with a focus on green technologies or those looking to transition to more sustainable practices may get support through initiatives aimed at reducing grid access delays and promoting clean energy. This not only aligns with global trends toward sustainability but also offers a competitive edge to businesses that prioritise environmental responsibility.

However, businesses in what are challenging economic times are likely to see the announcements in the broader economic context. The success of these measures is not guaranteed and is contingent upon effective implementation amidst economic uncertainties and potential public spending constraints. Therefore, businesses need to stay informed and agile, ready to adapt to changing regulations and economic conditions.

Looking on the bright side, this year’s Autumn Statement generally appears to present a multifaceted opportunity for businesses to grow, innovate, and adapt in a rapidly evolving technological environment. If UK businesses can capitalise on the initiatives announced and navigate the associated challenges, they may be better positioned to make the most of new technologies like AI.