Many businesses pay more than necessary for Microsoft licenses, SaaS, and cloud services. The reason is often a lack of overview, unused licenses, the wrong license level, little price comparison, and agreements that are not followed up on continuously.

With Med Adite's purchasing collaboration, businesses gain access to aggregated purchasing power, price analysis, and license optimisation. This leads to better terms, lower costs, and more control over both license usage and cloud consumption.

Does your business pay too much for licenses and cloud?

Licence and cloud costs are evolving rapidly. New users arrive, employees leave, departments adopt new solutions, and cloud resources are scaled up and down. At the same time, many agreements are renewed automatically, often without sufficient consideration of price, needs, and actual usage.

The result is that many businesses pay for more than they need.

Typical challenges include:

For organisations with large licence and cloud costs, even small improvements can have a significant financial impact.

Request cost analysis

What is Adite's procurement collaboration?

Adite's purchasing co-operation is a model where several businesses gain access to joint purchasing power, pre-negotiated terms, and ongoing monitoring of license and cloud costs.

Instead of each business having to analyse the market and negotiate alone, Adite uses market data, volume and supplier insight to secure better prices and more flexible terms.

The goal is simple: the business must pay the correct price for the correct licenses and correct cloud consumption.

The procurement collaboration is particularly well-suited for companies that want better control over their Microsoft licences, SaaS costs, cloud consumption, and ongoing optimisation of their licence portfolio.

A lower price is important, but the correct license level is just as important

Many start with the question: “Can we get a better price?”

It's an important question. But that's only half the job.

A lower price offers limited value if the business continues to pay for unused licenses, the wrong license level, or cloud resources that are not aligned with actual needs.

Therefore, Adite combines price optimisation with license optimisation. This means we look at both what the company is paying and what the company actually needs.

This combination provides a better basis for decision-making. The business gains insight into which licences should be retained, removed, downgraded, renegotiated, or consolidated into better agreements.

This is how Adite helps you reduce licensing costs

Through the purchasing collaboration, Adite assists with analysing current license and cloud costs, identifying improvement opportunities, and securing better terms where possible.

This can provide value in several areas:

It's all about gaining better control, better data quality, and more predictability in budgets. This is how costs are cut through procurement collaboration.

Get control of Microsoft licenses, SaaS and cloud consumption

Licence and cloud optimisation requires good data. Without an overview, it is difficult to know where costs are arising, which licences are in use, which users have the incorrect licence level, and where there is available capacity.

This is why Adite combines procurement cooperation with data-driven insights into license usage, agreements, costs, and optimisation opportunities.

For many of our customers, this happens through Otheo, Adite’s platform for procurement and license management. Otheo collects data on agreements, licenses, costs, and renewals in one place, making it easier to identify savings opportunities and track measures over time.

The business can get an overview of:

This makes it easier to move from uncertainty to concrete action.

Read more about Otheo here

From insight to action

A report alone does not create value. Value arises when insights are used to make better decisions and implement actions.

Adite's approach therefore isn't just about showing costs, but about helping the business to reduce unnecessary costs over time.

This may involve removing unused licenses, adjusting license levels, improving pricing conditions, renegotiating agreements, or establishing better routines for ongoing follow-up.

For businesses with many users, multiple departments, and high cloud consumption, this can have both economic and operational impact. New agreements are made – and before costs and commitments are locked in for several years to come.

How the purchasing cooperation works

The process is designed to be simple and effective.

First, the foundation for the analysis is established. Then, Adite reviews license data, agreements, prices, and usage patterns. Based on this, potential savings and improvement measures are identified.

Typical process:

  1. The business is joining the purchasing cooperative
  2. Adite analyses licence, SaaS and cloud costs
  3. Today's prices and agreements are assessed against available market insight
  4. Possible savings and optimisation measures are identified
  5. The business får et konkret beslutningsgrunnlag
  6. Measures are implemented by agreement with the customer

This provides a safe and structured path from analysis to actual cost reduction.

Contact us for a no-obligation chat

Who is the purchasing collaboration suitable for?

Aditi's purchasing collaborations are suitable for businesses that have significant costs related to Microsoft licenses, SaaS, and cloud services.

This is particularly relevant for businesses that:

Why choose Adite?

Adite is supplier-independent and works on the client's side of the table. This means that our goal is to ensure the best possible outcome for the business, not for the supplier.

We combine experience from procurement, license optimisation, market insight and data-driven analysis. This provides customers with a partner who can assess price, needs, contract structure, and actual cost drivers.

For customers, this means better control, lower risk and a greater likelihood of achieving the right conditions over time.

Reduce license and cloud costs with better insight and stronger purchasing power

Licensing and cloud costs should not be managed by gut feeling. They should be managed with data, market insight, and ongoing optimisation.

With Adite's purchasing cooperation, the business gains access to collective purchasing power, price analysis, and license optimisation that can contribute to lower costs, less administration, and better control.

Would you like to know if your business is overpaying for licenses, SaaS, or cloud services?

Contact Adite for a review of today's licence and cloud costs, and see what savings the purchasing collaboration can bring.

Most businesses make decisions about IT and telecoms contracts based on a limited view of the market. The information they have available often comes from one or two suppliers, previous contracts – or internal assumptions about what is «reasonable».

The result is that assessments are made on a narrower and weaker basis for decisions than is necessary.

The problem is not a lack of competence in the CFO or CTO, but limited market insight; how agreements are actually structured in comparable businesses and why, which cost elements are typically underestimated, and which mechanisms to watch out for – those that tend to kick in over time.

When the basis for decision-making is weak, the total cost of ownership (TCO) becomes a theoretical exercise. TCO appears as a management tool on paper, but the actual consequences are only visible much later in the contract period.

What is Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) – and why is it relevant?

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) describes all costs associated with an IT or telecoms solution throughout the entire contract period. Not just what is stated in the offer, but the sum of what the business actually pays – directly and indirectly – to make the solution work in practice.

In IT and telecom procurements, this is precisely where many decisions slip up. The total cost is affected by far more than the price per service. It's shaped by how the solution is implemented, how changes are handled, how much internal time is tied up, and what commercial agreements are in the contract. It is these factors that often receive little attention in the tender phase but become highly significant over three to five years.

This is why TCO is relevant: because it provides a more realistic picture of what an agreement will actually cost the business over time – not just what it appears to cost on paper.

Why price is almost always misleading

In practice, there's a well-known market pattern: the supplier that appears most cost-effective in the tender phase is not necessarily the one that provides the lowest cost over time. Small caveats in the contract, unclear SLAs, or limitations in flexibility can lead to noticeable extra costs later on.

Deficient agreements rarely lead to one large, visible cost. Instead, many small burdens arise: extra invoices, changes that are priced highly, internal resources that must compensate for poor delivery, or solutions that do not scale in line with the business's needs. Over time, the sum becomes significant.

For many companies, this is also the explanation as to why actual IT and telecom costs are gradually moving away from the budget, without a single decision being identifiable as the cause.

Many considerations necessitate a holistic view.

It's no wonder that larger companies take a long time to finalise the right IT and telecommunications agreements. The decisions almost always affect several parts of the organisation simultaneously, and the considerations to be taken are both numerous and partly contradictory:

Putting these perspectives into context is challenging. The requirements must be assessed and weighted correctly, both for what is known today and for what may change in the future. This requires a holistic view that is rarely fully present internally – especially when decisions are made under time pressure or within established supplier relationships.

When each perspective is considered in isolation, it becomes difficult to see how commercial choices actually affect operational reality – and vice versa. This is where total cost of ownership gets its true function.

Total cost of ownership as a common framework

TCO is not an attempt to simplify complexity, but a framework to highlight the interconnections. With TCO as a common framework, it becomes clear how price, contract structure, technical choices, and operational burdens collectively affect the company's scope of action over time.

When TCO is used correctly, it provides a common language across roles. Not by eliminating disagreement, but by making the consequences of different priorities clearer by:

The benefit of an external holistic view

An external perspective primarily adds comparability. When agreements are assessed against how similar solutions are actually structured in the market – across suppliers, industries, and organisational models – it becomes clear which costs are driven by genuine needs, and which are the result of historical choices or a weak negotiating position.

At the same time, a gap is often revealed between the technical choice and the operational consequence. Solutions that appear rational in isolation can in practice tie up internal resources, reduce flexibility, or make changes unnecessarily expensive. These costs rarely appear during the tender phase but materialise gradually during operation.

This is also where many decision-making processes get stuck. Finance, technology, procurement, and business assess the same deal from different perspectives, without a common language to weigh them against each other. The result is often compromises based on assumptions, rather than a holistic view of cost, risk, and scope.

Experience from large, complex organisations shows that the value of an independent perspective precisely lies here: in the ability to gather these considerations, put them into context, and highlight the consequences before they are locked into a contract. Not to drive change for change's sake, but to give decision-makers a more accurate picture of what IT and telecom agreements actually entail over time.

What we value most about Adite is that they are always at the forefront and know the market better than us. They come with updated insights, concrete recommendations, and clear decision support. This allows us to make the right decisions faster – and with confidence.

- Jan Haslev, IT Operations Manager at Ecura

Customer Case: Ecura x Adite - A Partnership in Development

When should businesses question their own TCO assessments?

When the total cost of ownership in practice is based on tenders, historical agreements, or internal assumptions – and not on insight into how similar agreements are structured in the market – there is reason to pause.

The same applies when finance, IT, and purchasing have conducted thorough assessments separately, but without a common framework to view the consequences collectively. In such cases, TCO often becomes a calculation on paper, while the actual costs are only gradually revealed during operation.

Typical signs include:

In such situations, it's rarely about a lack of internal expertise. It's about a limited basis for comparison and a lack of a holistic view. When decisions are made without sufficient market insight, the total cost of ownership is assessed on a narrower and weaker foundation than necessary.

Then it may be wise to bring in an external perspective. Not to overturn previous decisions, but to strengthen the basis for decisions before new agreements are made – and before costs and commitments are locked in for several years to come.

Contact us for a no-obligation chat

The market for IT partnerships and management agreements is clearly changing. Increasingly, businesses are moving away from long, rigid contracts, instead demanding more flexible collaboration models with higher demands on quality, competence, and ongoing value creation.

Based on experience from a range of procurement and advisory assignments, Adite has observed this trend shift over several years.

The development also corresponds with analyses from Gartner, which over time has pointed to a clear decline in large and long-term IT outsourcing agreements, in favour of shorter contracts that provide greater flexibility and lower risk of vendor lock-in.

From security in contract to security in delivery

Previously, long IT agreements were often viewed as a form of security. A multi-year contract provided predictable costs, stable deliveries and fewer procurement processes. Today, this is viewed differently. As technology, security requirements and business needs change faster than before, long agreements can in practice become a hindrance.

Shorter deals shift the focus:

This gives the business greater room for manoeuvre, but at the same time places far higher demands on how IT agreements are structured, followed up, and evaluated.

What do shorter IT agreements entail in practice?

When agreements become shorter, the dynamic of customer-supplier collaboration fundamentally changes.

For the business, this means requirements for, among other things:

For the IT provider, this means:

In other words, shorter contracts reward suppliers who deliver, not just suppliers who retain the contract without proactive follow-up.

As demands increase, so does complexity

A clear consequence of this shift in trend is that procurement and contract negotiations have become more complex. Many businesses find it challenging to formulate the correct requirements, precisely because IT services today span everything from technical operation to strategic advice in cloud, security, and artificial intelligence.

At the same time, a gap often arises between the company's expectations of flexibility, predictability, and value, and the supplier's need for clear frameworks, delimitations, and profitability.

This gap often leads to misunderstandings right from the procurement phase. Misunderstandings in turn lead to frustration once the agreement is in operation. Shorter contracts don't necessarily make this easier; they simply make it more important to get it right from the start.

Read more: What is required of the IT agreement for good cybersecurity?

The need for translation between business and IT

In practice, many challenges in modern IT agreements revolve around language and perspective. The business often speaks in terms of risk, flexibility, cost control, and business objectives. The IT provider, on the other hand, speaks in terms of technical deliverables, capabilities, architecture, and SLAs.

When these perspectives do not align, there is a risk of agreements that look good on paper but deliver little value in practice. For a business, the consequences are deliverables that are perceived as technically correct but business-wise misprioritised, and in many cases can lead to conflicts regarding responsibility, changes and expectations.

This is where professional advice becomes crucial.

Valuable advice when it's needed

Adite helps businesses structure, procure, and manage IT agreements in a market where flexibility and quality have become more important than contract length.

Our role is to act as a liaison between business and technology, ensuring both parties understand each other's requirements, frameworks, and goals. In our experience, the follow-up of IT agreements today requires a good starting point. Companies benefit from clear requirement specifications, realistic agreement structures, and professional process management.

We provide valuable advice when needed, because:

Smaller contract – more responsibility

Shorter IT agreements offer greater flexibility, but they also leave less room for unclear expectations. They place higher demands on both parties and reward those who are able to collaborate well, be transparent, and deliver continuous value.

For decision-makers in IT, finance, and procurement, this means that IT agreements must increasingly be treated as a strategic tool. Not just a contract – but a living collaboration.

Would you like to know more about how modern IT partnerships can be structured?

Get in touch for a no-obligation chat

7 tips til bedre styring af din virksomheds IT-leverandøraftale

When cybersecurity is discussed in Norwegian businesses, the conversation often quickly turns to technology. Surveillance. Systems. Tools.

In practice, however, the security level is often decided earlier and in a completely different place:
in agreements.

Most businesses has a security provider. The contract is signed, the service is operational, reports are delivered. Nevertheless, many lack clear answers when the most basic questions are asked:

These are questions many people feel they have, but few have entirely clear answers to. And precisely because of this, they are often postponed. Not because they are complicated, but because they require clarity in roles, responsibilities, and expectations.

The central question of control is simple, but often uncomfortable: Is the business actually getting what it's paying for?

Agreements that do not keep pace with reality

Many cybersecurity agreements were entered into at a different stage of the company's development than today.
Over time, needs evolve, the threat landscape becomes more complex, and expectations for interaction between IT, management, and suppliers increase.

However, the agreement often remains unchanged.

This became clear during the work with BlueNord. Security services were in place, but there was a need for greater clarity around responsibility, interaction, and content – particularly at the interface between operational activities and advisory services.

When security is reduced to a service that «just works», it becomes difficult to make demands – and even harder to make the right ones.

More than monitoring and response time

Security deliveries are increasingly about more than operational activities. Businesses are not only requesting monitoring and incident management, but also ongoing assessments, prioritisation, and advice relevant to their own business.

This includes, among other things:

For BlueNord, it was crucial to have precisely this clarified in the agreement: a formal SOC delivery, combined with real advice and proactive collaboration – also directed at the company's management.

For us, this is about more than just increased security in a technical sense. The updated agreement provides us with better protection, greater robustness – and not least, security efforts that are more closely aligned with the organisation's actual goals and priorities.

IT Manager BlueNord, Helge Zahl

This presumes agreements that clearly distinguish between operational delivery and advice, and which describe how these functions will complement each other over time.

When targeted negotiation delivers the most value

When existing agreements no longer meet requirements, broad competition is often seen as the only solution. This is not always correct. In many cases, targeted negotiation can yield the greatest effect – assuming that functional areas, responsibilities, and finances are viewed in context.

In working with BlueNord, emphasis was therefore placed on a targeted negotiation process, with a clear focus on content rather than volume. The questions asked were fundamental, yet crucial:

The result was not greater certainty “on paper”, but an agreement that to a greater extent reflects the company's actual current needs – and provides better conditions for management, collaboration, and further development. After this work, it makes sense to consider the way forward. Only then will one know what which may potentially be compared.

The value often lies in concretising what the delivery should actually include, how the collaboration will work in practice – and ensuring that the finances are commensurate with the responsibility. Only then can one be sure that one is getting what one is paying for.

Knut Riiber, Senior Advisor Adite

Security starts before technology is deployed

It is not always obvious when a security arrangement should be reviewed. Often, the solutions work fine in everyday life until they don't.

A useful exercise could therefore be to ask yourself a few simple questions:

If you have to pause to think, hesitate with your answers, or get conflicting internal responses, it's often a sign that the deal warrants closer scrutiny.

This is demanding work that takes time and capacity in an already busy everyday life. At the same time, it is precisely here that the foundation is laid for management, predictability, and real control over risk. Addressing agreements is rarely the most urgent task at hand – but it is often what matters most over time.

Procurement and consulting in IT and telecoms are increasingly about making the right choices in an ever more complex landscape. Technology is evolving rapidly, delivery models are changing, and the demands for security, flexibility, and cost control are becoming ever clearer.

For many businesses, IT has become one of the biggest cost drivers. Yet, it is surprisingly often unclear what is actually being paid for, which services are in active use – and whether the contractual framework is adapted to current needs.

IT agreements entered into many years ago continue to exist, even though security requirements, working patterns, and technological assumptions have changed significantly over time. Nevertheless, such agreements are rarely reviewed holistically after their initial signing.

So how do you know who the right supplier is for you?

When IT agreements don't keep up

Renegotiating IT contracts isn't primarily about squeezing the price. It's about cost control, risk management, and crucially, ensuring that agreements and actual usage are aligned.

Without this coordination, both economic and technological decisions will be made on a flawed basis.

Control over the IT agreement gives:

For management as a whole, this provides better conditions for managing IT as an integrated part of the business and not as an isolated cost area. Furthermore, it increases ownership of the agreement for those who are to decide which is the right IT partner and supplier at any given time.

Costs are one side – control is the other

In many businesses, payment for IT services that are no longer in use can still be found, often as a result of overlapping deliveries from multiple suppliers and license agreements that have never been adjusted after moving to the cloud. Such historical choices are rarely the result of poor decisions, but rather of a lack of follow-up over time. Over time, however, this can lead to unnecessary complexity and reduced transparency in IT deliveries.

The challenge is that this doesn't just affect costs. Over time, it also impacts governance, responsibility, and the basis for decision-making – particularly when agreements, technology, and practices diverge.

Agreements, security and practices must go hand in hand

When IT agreements are not updated, security, compliance, and responsibility can also become unclear. Old SLAs, outdated security requirements, and a lack of flexibility can create both operational and legal risk. This becomes particularly evident when faced with new regulatory requirements and increased use of cloud-based services.

A structured review of IT agreements provides management with better insight into which services actually create value, how capacity and licensing are dimensioned, and whether the contractual framework supports current security and operational requirements.

Often, the conclusion isn't changing suppliers, but a better-tailored IT agreement.

Knut Riiber, Senior Advisor Adite

Better control yields more value

Many businesses only recognise the value of structured analysis and renegotiation once IT becomes a manageable area again, rather than just a cost. It is often here that the gap between contractual frameworks, practice, and actual needs becomes apparent.

Businesses that take control in this way generally achieve both lower costs, a simpler contractual structure, and higher quality in their deliveries. Most importantly, IT becomes a manageable area – not a black hole in the budget.

Next step Get control of your IT agreements

Many businesses are aware that IT costs have increased, but lack a comprehensive overview of what they are actually paying for – and what commitments are tied up in their contractual agreements. A structured review of IT contracts provides a better basis for decision-making, both financially and in terms of security. This lays the groundwork for deciding whether they are with the right supplier, or should explore alternative suppliers in the market.

Adite assists companies with the analysis and renegotiation of IT contracts., with the aim of better control, correct dimensioning, and more value from existing agreements.

🔘 Speak with a counsellor
🔘 Find out more about procurement and consulting

In many businesses, the telecommunications contract is something that's in place but rarely given much thought. Responsibility often lies with finance, IT, or HR, but the contract itself often receives low priority: «It just has to work.»

We know that business telecommunications is far more than just a working dial tone and enough gigabytes. The agreement impacts costs, employees, security and operations every single day.

Telecommunications agreements differ from many other contractual areas in that usage changes continuously. Costs are continuously affected by the number of users, the choice of solutions, and how they are actually used. Additionally, contract terms are often complex and difficult to compare.

Having control over a company's telecom agreement is therefore largely about knowing what is actually happening within the business in practice, not just on paper:

The telecommunications agreement is part of the company's fundamental infrastructure. Over time, I see how important it is for control and predictability, and for ensuring that choices made actually support how the business is meant to function.

Caroline Keller, Head of Procurement & Consulting

What does it really mean to be in control?

Organisations grow, roles change and ways of working evolve. Over time, new solutions emerge on the market, while existing subscriptions are used differently – or are left without clear ownership. A lack of overview of needs and actual usage often becomes costly over time, and the consequences involve far more than pounds and pence.

A recurring challenge for many businesses is the management of the lifecycle – not just of devices, but of employees. Who is actually included in the agreement today? What services do different roles need to work effectively? How is onboarding managed, and what happens to subscriptions, numbers, and access when someone leaves?

Having control over your company's telecom agreement is therefore about far more than just negotiating price. It's about ensuring that the agreement supports the company's actual needs, and that it's manageable in the day-to-day reality of change.

More specifically, it means having an overview of terms, contract periods and cost drivers, and understanding the relationship between usage and the solution. Only then can the business make adjustments at the right time, based on actual needs.

Talk to us about telecom and procurement

The right price is more than the lowest monthly amount

Many businesses only consider their telecom contract when the binding period is about to expire. The focus then often becomes price – and price alone. The challenge is that the market changes rapidly, and what was a competitive deal two years ago is not necessarily so today.

The right price isn't just about the lowest possible monthly amount, but about how well the solution is tailored to actual use:

Inadequate solutions quickly create friction in the daily work lives of employees.

Without ongoing insight into its own needs and available market solutions, a company risks paying for functionality it doesn't need or lacking what actually provides value. Over time, this affects both cost structure and user experience.

The telecommunications agreement is also a matter of security

The telecommunications agreement is closely linked to the company's security posture, but is not always treated as such. Mobile subscriptions and associated services are gateways to systems, data, and internal interfaces, particularly in a hybrid work environment.

When an overview is lacking, the risk increases that access is not revoked upon departure, that numbers and devices have unclear ownership, or that solutions are used in ways that are not in line with the company's security and compliance requirements.

This is also not an area that can be «set» once and for all. Telecom agreements for businesses must be followed up continuously, in step with changes in the organisation, the market, and technology. When the agreement is treated as a one-off project, the company loses both control and scope for action over time.

Companies that work systematically with their telecom agreements are therefore in a stronger position. They are better equipped to ensure the right access, reduce risk, and simultaneously adapt solutions to actual usage. Over time, the telecom agreement becomes a strategic tool – not just an administrative necessity.

Will you get more out of the telecom agreement?

For many businesses, there is potential for improvement in existing telecom agreements in terms of costs, control, and security. At Adite, we help companies gain an overview and a better basis for decision-making, based on how the agreement is actually used today.

Get in touch for a no-obligation chat and we'll look together at how your telecom agreement can become an advantage – not just something that «has to work».

Explore our consulting services

For many businesses, the challenge arises in everyday life when decisions need to be made quickly, with limited resources and a complex supplier landscape.

Procurement of IT and telecom services – such as systems, licenses, mobile and communication solutions – ranges from strategic choices to concrete, time-consuming processes. It concerns solutions that are meant to function over time, agreements that affect costs, and suppliers who impose varying demands on expertise and follow-up.

For many businesses, the challenge isn't a lack of expertise, but rather limited capacity, a complex supplier market, and the need to make good decisions amidst a busy everyday life.

What does purchasing assistance involve in practice?

The need for procurement assistance varies significantly from business to business. Some have their own procurement specialists and IT resources, but lack time or market overview. Others require more support to ensure progress and quality in implementation.

Therefore, procurement assistance cannot be seen as a standardised delivery either.

Typical areas where businesses seek support for assessing IT and telecommunications services:

The common denominator is a better basis for decision-making, a faster pace and lower risk.

A supplement – not a replacement for internal expertise

Procurement assistance works best as a collaboration. This is especially true for IT and telecommunications procurement, where technical, commercial and organisational considerations must be assessed simultaneously.

In practice, close collaboration often occurs with:

Procurement assistance works best when it is closely linked to the actual needs of the business. Whether it's full support throughout the entire process or targeted assistance in selected phases, the scope is adapted along the way.

Internal competence provides direction,

External experience drives progress.

Flexible assistance on the company's terms

For most businesses, good procurement boils down to one thing: getting the right expertise and capacity at the right time, without building more internally or taking unnecessary risks.

When internal insight is combined with external experience and drive, it becomes possible to make better decisions, maintain momentum, and reduce risk. The result is not just better deals, but a way of working that allows for both control and pace.

Procurement assistance isn't about relinquishing responsibility, but about gaining extra support where it adds the most value, whether that's in entire processes, individual phases, or when you need an experienced perspective to move forward.

Today, software is purchased with a few keystrokes.

One department orders an analytics tool. Another is testing an AI subscription. IT adds new cloud licences. Agreements are automatically renewed.

Eventually, few people realise what their business is actually paying for - or how much is actually being spent.

- "We see time and time again that companies pay for licences they don't need or that no one uses. These are simply hidden costs that build up over time," says Jon Ivar Bjørtomt, CEO of Adite.

To solve the problem, the company has developed Otheo - a proprietary technology platform that gives businesses a full overview of software, licences and cloud costs, and shows where they can cut unnecessary expenses.

This is the solution they now want to scale when the company opens up to new investors through Folkeinvest.

Interested? Read more about the opportunity here!

From consulting to technology - with proven growth

Adite started out as a consultancy helping companies with smarter procurement of telecoms, IT and cloud services.

Over time, they discovered a clear pattern among their customers: Many didn't know what they were paying for.

- Licence and cloud costs grew year on year, while at the same time the overview got worse. "Software costs have become a black hole for many companies. That's why we built a tool that provides control," says Bjørtomt.

Today, the company combines consulting with technology - and has grown rapidly:NOK 55 million in revenue in 202534 employees and a customer base of SMEs and large corporationsOver 500 per cent growth since 2021Over 50 per cent average annual growth in recent years

Customers include Elkem, AF Gruppen, OBOS, Yara and Aker Solutions.

- We have established a profitable core business with solid customer relationships. This gives us a strong foundation as we now scale Otheo.

A problem most organisations face

Digitalisation has made it easier than ever to buy new tools - but also far more difficult to keep track of them.

Software and cloud services are now among the fastest growing cost items for many organisations. At the same time, industry analysis shows that companies without centralised management often pay significantly more than necessary for SaaS licences.

- "When we analyse the use of licences, we often find that 15-30 percent is not used or overlaps with other tools. It's simply money running out of the budget," says Jon Ivar Bjørtomt.

For Adite, this means a large and growing market for the Otheo platform.

Otheo is a SaaS Management Platform. In short, it acts as a software inventory and control system:

  • Gathers all licences and agreements in one place
  • Provides notifications before renewals
  • Automates onboarding and offboarding
  • Shows who is using what
  • Detects inactive and overlapping licences

What was previously scattered in spreadsheets, invoices and various portals is now collected in a single overview.

- The aim is to provide customers with a single source of truth. Then they can both save money and make better decisions.

Customers using the solution today have achieved savings of up to 35 per cent on licence costs - while simplifying administration.

Interested? Read more about the share issue here

Raising capital to accelerate growth

Otheo is not just a concept. The platform has paying customers and growing recurring revenue:

Today, less than 10 per cent of businesses use such tools. At the same time, analysts estimate that the proportion could pass 50 per cent within a few years.

- "The timing is very good. The need is clear, and the market is about to explode. That gives us a big window now," says Bjørtomt.

To take the next step, Adite is now opening a issue through Folkeinvest.

The company plans to pick up NOK 5-10 million, with a subscription price of NOK 8 per share.

The capital will be used to:

- "The most important thing for us now is to speed up distribution. The product is there and customers recognise the value. Now it's about reaching out more widely.

Read more about Adite here

A combination that attracts investors

Bjørtomt believes that the company's greatest strength lies in the combination of two worlds:

  1. Established, profitable consultancy business with stable income
  2. Scalable SaaS platform with high growth and repeatable revenue

- Many SaaS companies start from scratch. We already have customers, expertise and cash flow. This reduces risk and shortens the path to scaling.

In the long term, the company points to several possible paths for value realisation, including an industrial transaction or an IPO, depending on developments and the market.

Four reasons to invest in Adite

  1. Documented growth
    Strong revenue growth and a solid customer base.
  2. Profitable core business
    More revenue streams and lower risk than pure start-ups.
  3. Scalable technology
    Otheo provides repeatable revenue and high growth potential.
  4. Market in strong growth
    Licence and cloud costs are increasing - the need for control is growing.

Join the journey

Adite believes they have built the foundation - and that the time is now right to scale.

- "We want to bring on board committed investors who want to help build a Nordic technology company. For us, this is about doing something that creates real value for our customers - while at the same time building a company with great growth potential," says Bjørtomt.

Read more about the investment offer here!

And how Otheo + Adite helps organisations take back control

When Microsoft's new pricing model comes into full effect in 2026, many Norwegian organisations will be in for an unpleasant surprise: The costs of new EA agreements can increase by 30-40 per cent.

The reason is Microsoft's decision to remove the volume discounts in the Enterprise Agreement (EA) - a change that came into effect in November 2025 and is now forcing organisations to rethink their licensing strategy. Many are considering alternatives, and more and more are looking towards the CSP model, Microsoft's preferred form of purchase. But with this freedom comes a whole new set of operational responsibilities.

This is the backdrop for why Otheo and Adite now become key partners for organisations that want control, predictability and smarter licence management.

A new licence reality: From predictability to dynamism

In EA agreements, companies have long had a stable number of licences tied up over several years. Now that discounts are disappearing, it's no longer price that separates EA from CSP - but flexibility.

CSP offers greater freedom of choice with lock-in periods ranging from one month to three years. It sounds simple, but it involves far more frequent decisions and continuous follow-up. For businesses, this means, among other things:

The models are not difficult - but they are demanding to handle manually on a large scale.

Flexibility without automation = expensive flexibility

Flexible CSP licences are more expensive than annual EA licences. That's why flexibility needs to be actually utilised rather than just paid for.

Without automation, organisations run the risk of:

Flexibility has no value until it is managed - preferably automatically.

Otheo: Automated, data-driven licence management

The Otheo platform gives organisations a complete overview of SaaS usage, including Microsoft licences, cloud usage and other subscriptions. The platform automates the entire licence lifecycle and ensures that the portfolio is always optimal.

Otheo handles, among other things:

Customers often experience Hundreds of automated licence events per month - a volume that is almost impossible to handle manually.

The result is lower costs, better control and fewer surprises.

Adite: Bargaining power and strategic licence advice

Even though Microsoft's volume discounts are disappearing, there are still major price differences in the market. Through a structured purchasing partnership, Adite has negotiated terms that match historical EA discounts - often providing the most cost-effective options in today's market.

Adite assists organisations with:

The combination of Otheo + Adite gives organisations both the lowest possible price and the highest possible control.

Conclusion: A challenging change - and a great opportunity

Microsoft's new licence model shifts far more responsibility to businesses. For many, this will be a challenge - but also a rare opportunity to modernise a cost driver that has often been poorly optimised.

Businesses that want to succeed in the future should:

Contact us

    Contact Adite