How much the current structure constrains what's possible next. Not just technology. Org charts, vendor contracts, physical infrastructure, anything that makes changing direction expensive.
FLEXIBLE VS FROZEN
The org can replace components without breaking everything else. Contracts are short. Architecture is modular. What got you here doesn't have to be what gets you there.
Changing how work gets done requires changing the org itself. Expensive, slow, and politically dangerous. Touch one thing, break five. So it doesn't happen.
High lock-in doesn't make transformation impossible. It makes it expensive enough that the people with authority to approve it are the same people whose power depends on things staying the same.
Organizations with high structural lock-in spend 60-80% of IT budget maintaining what already exists. Not because they planned it that way. Because the existing infrastructure demands to be fed. What's left over for new capability is whatever the maintenance doesn't eat first.
Modular architecture means components can be swapped without rebuilding everything. The platform bends when strategy changes.
API-first. Decoupled services. Architecture designed for optionality, not permanence.
$124B+ in total assets tied to cable infrastructure, parks, studios, and linear TV rights. Every strategic option runs through that constraint first.
40-year refineries priced at original investment. Unwinding them means taking losses nobody wants to authorize.