Field Note — FN-003

When Dependency Becomes Governance

One-line: When exit costs rise, oversight degrades—and the supplier, platform, or person becomes your de facto governor.
Pattern: Dependency Trap
Primary failure surface: Counterweights + correction loops

The Pattern

A system can’t credibly walk away. Dependency hardens into lock-in. Oversight weakens because confrontation threatens continuity.

What it looks like

• “We can’t switch now” becomes permanent
• Critical knowledge concentrated in one team/person/vendor
• Renewals become automatic, not evaluated
• Workarounds pile up to accommodate the dependency
• Risk gets re-labeled as “operational reality”

Failure mechanism

Switching costs + time pressure + operational fear. When exit is impossible, governance becomes negotiation with a party you can’t replace.

Minimum viable controls

Verification

• Dependency risk reviews tied to renewals and budgets
• Proof of portability (data/process export) as a requirement

Counterweights

• Multi-home or modular alternatives (even partial)
• Knowledge de-concentration (documentation + cross-training)

Correction loops

• Periodic “exit drills” (test the path before crisis)
• Trigger thresholds (if costs/latency/security events rise, review is mandatory)

Proof you’re controlling it

• You have an exit plan you’ve actually tested
• No single party can halt operations by refusing cooperation
• Switching costs are measured and actively reduced

Where it shows up

Cloud platforms, AI vendors, supply chains, critical staff, geopolitical alliances—any domain where dependence becomes policy.

Related Field Notes

• FN-002: When Authority Dissolves Permission (Authority)
• FN-001: When Proof Becomes Performative (Verification)

Related Patterns

Dependency Trap • Concentration/Capture Risk • Authority Without Friction