When Does Exclusivity Become A Liability?

This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more.This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more.Sanjay Ghare is the founder and CEO of Vervotech (a Constellation Inc. company) and an investor in travel startups.

getty​Exclusivity has always been integral to any industry that signals stronger business relationships.

It can create commitment where relationships would otherwise remain transactional. It can justify investments that neither party would make without certainty. It can give customers access to something differentiated and add value, and it can give partners the confidence to enter a relationship unlikely to disappear overnight.

The problem begins when exclusivity is treated as an objective goal rather than a deliberate strategic choice.

In highly interconnected industries, that distinction matters more than ever.

Travel technology is one such industry, one that is built on connections. Properties connect to travel agencies. Travel agencies connect to suppliers, and every node in the ecosystem relies on technology platforms at various stages. Inventory, rates and content move across these multiple nodes before a customer ever sees a booking option. A single transaction may pass through several commercial relationships, each adding value to the ecosystem.

In such an interconnected system, exclusivity isn’t automatically good or bad.

What does it mean to have it at the edge rather than the core? The difference is critical, yet fairly simple to grasp.

A curated partner program can create differentiation. A premium relationship can justify committed support, deeper cooperation or joint investment. Exclusive access to an event, service or capability can create value precisely because not everyone has it.

In these situations, exclusivity is a feature. It rewards commitment yet does not necessarily restrict the market itself.

However, the calculation changes when exclusivity moves closer to the core commercial layer, the layer that involves rates, inventory, distribution access and the fundamental terms on which businesses compete.

These are the parts of the ecosystem that benefit from choice.

A travel agency dependent on a single supplier carries concentration risk. A supplier that depends heavily on one travel distribution partner faces the same problem in reverse. A technology provider whose commercial future is tied disproportionately to one client may enjoy predictable revenue in the short term while gradually losing the flexibility required to grow beyond that relationship.

The risk is regularly disguised as stability.

A business wins a large client. Revenue becomes predictable. Product development fits around a clear commercial opportunity. Teams become increasingly familiar with the client’s requirements.

The partnership grows stronger. So does the dependency.

A healthy exclusive relationship gives both parties a reason to invest. A dependent relationship gives one party fewer alternatives.

Those two things can look remarkably similar at the beginning.

The problem becomes visible when a single relationship begins to shape the business itself. Product priorities increasingly revolve around one customer’s requirements. Commercial decisions become more cautious because protecting the relationship takes precedence. The cost of losing that customer becomes so high that negotiating power gradually shifts.

The business is no longer simply serving an important client.

That distinction matters in technology ecosystems because concentration risk does not remain confined to revenue. It eventually influences product strategy, innovation and commercial access.

Exclusivity should create a stronger partnership. It should not create a business that cannot function without one.

The case for caution becomes stronger when exclusivity controls the inputs other businesses need to compete.

Travel distribution is especially more sensitive to this because its economic activities are tightly interconnected. A restriction introduced at one point in the chain does not necessarily remain there. It can affect downstream sourcing options, shift upstream negotiating power and change competitive forces among participants who were never part of the first agreement.

This is why exclusivity around commercial fundamentals requires more caution than exclusivity around differentiated experiences.

At the same time, I am not necessarily advocating for unlimited openness as the answer.

A network where everyone can access everything can create a different problem: commoditization.

When multiple businesses have access to the same inventory, the same commercial opportunities and increasingly similar technology, meaningful differentiation becomes harder. Price becomes the most visible competitive lever.

Competition initially appears healthy. Lower prices benefit customers and force businesses to become more efficient. This might work wonderfully well in an industry like FMCG. But in the technological space, sustained competition based primarily on price can create a net negative for the ecosystem. Margins shrink, investment capacity falls and businesses have fewer resources to innovate or improve the underlying infrastructure.

Volume may increase while value declines.

That is not necessarily a sign of a healthier market.

The strongest ecosystems are rarely completely open or completely closed. They operate somewhere in between.

Exclusivity is able to encourage investment, reward commitment and create differentiated value. Openness can preserve choice, encourage competition and diminish dependency. The mistake would be applying either principle universally.

At the edges of an ecosystem, exclusivity could create value. At the core, excessive exclusivity might create dependency. The challenge, therefore, is not choosing between exclusivity and openness.

It is deciding where each belongs. Businesses need choice. They also need commitment. Ecosystems need competition, but they also need relationships stable enough to justify long-term investment.

The question is whether an exclusive relationship strengthens the business without restricting its ability to grow beyond it. That’s where the line between strategy and dependency begins. This line is the one that businesses should cautiously look at before they leap.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?