From dependence to interdependence

Three very different kinds of connection

Dependence is not simply working with someone else. Businesses have always relied on suppliers, customers, service providers and colleagues. Dependence becomes problematic when one organisation cannot make meaningful decisions without another organisation’s permission – or cannot leave without losing information, relationships or essential capabilities.

Imagine a small supplier whose trading history, reputation and onboarding credentials exist only inside one dominant marketplace. The supplier benefits from participating. But if it moves elsewhere, the records that demonstrate its reliability do not move with it. The platform has become more than a useful service: it now controls access to a portion of the supplier’s commercial identity.

Independence is the ability to stand on your own. You can hold your own information, evaluate alternatives and decide whether to join or leave a service. Independence is essential, but an isolated business with perfectly independent software may still struggle to trade. Every new relationship requires expensive introductions between systems.

Interdependence is different. Independent participants choose to rely on one another because the relationship creates value. The conditions of cooperation are understandable and not owned exclusively by one party. Each can leave, and each has good reasons to stay.

Why the exit matters

Consider two partnerships that look identical on a dashboard. In both, suppliers and buyers exchange documents, process orders and settle invoices. In the first partnership, extracting transaction history and moving to another provider requires negotiating bespoke terms with the operator. In the second, participants can take their information and use compatible tools on published interfaces.

Both partnerships may be convenient today. The second is more likely to sustain fair terms tomorrow because the option to leave is credible. Exit is not a sign of failed cooperation. It is part of what keeps cooperation voluntary.

Of course, interoperability cannot eliminate every cost of changing systems. Organisations must manage people, processes, contracts, security and regulation. An open interface is not a magic switch. But it can remove artificial obstacles and make choice more practical.

The network changes shape

Visualise a closed circle containing many participants. Everything flows through the same centre. Remove that centre, and the participants are separate and free – but they have lost the connections that made trade possible. Now let the independent participants reconnect through shared rules. They remain distinct, but cooperation returns without a single owner of the network.

That is the movement from dependence, through independence, to interdependence. The destination is not less cooperation. It is more resilient, more voluntary cooperation.

How to test a claim of openness

When a system promises portability or freedom, ask practical questions. Can participants export useful information, in formats other systems understand? Can a different provider implement the interface without special approval? Can a buyer or supplier choose which counterparties receive which information? Are the rules for changing the standard public and accountable? Can a participant keep trading after replacing one intermediary?

Each positive answer strengthens freedom. Each negative answer deserves scrutiny, even if the service is otherwise excellent.

Try it: draw an exit path

Choose a commercial platform used by an organisation you know. Draw the organisation, the platform and three trading relationships. Mark where identity, history, contracts and trust evidence are stored. Then imagine replacing the platform. Which information remains useful? Which relationships survive? Which steps require permission? Write one change that would make leaving less disruptive, without stripping the original platform of its legitimate competitive advantages.

Key terms

• Dependence: A relationship where the ability to act is constrained by another party’s control.
• Independence: Capacity to make choices and retain control over one’s assets and information.
• Interdependence: Voluntary cooperation among independently capable participants.
• Portability: The practical ability to carry relevant information and credentials between systems.
• Exit right: The meaningful ability to end a relationship and choose another route.

Remember

The manifesto's defining test is simple: everyone is free to leave, and chooses to stay. Freedom is not the absence of relationships. It is the ability to enter them on fair, shared terms.