Your customers are not only evaluating equipment on performance or price.
The findings suggest they are also considering how assets can be managed beyond their initial use — particularly where lifecycle requirements are more visible.
2026.06.26
End-of-life: the blind spot – and what it means for OEMs and their distribution partners
In our previous articles, we explored how capital tied up in equipment can constrain growth, how lifecycle complexity is adding to the overall challenge of managing assets, and how investment decisions are becoming more conditional in an uncertain environment.
These perspectives highlight a broader dynamic: equipment strategy is no longer limited to acquisition. Yet one dimension continues to stand out as particularly complex: end-of-life management.
A growing influence on procurement decisions
Lifecycle considerations are no longer confined to operational teams. The data shows that they are increasingly part of procurement and investment discussions. 68% of decision-makers say that the ease of managing refurbishment, reuse, recycling or disposal influences equipment purchasing decisions.
This suggests that end-of-life is not only a downstream concern, but a factor that is considered earlier in the decision-making process.
What this signals for OEMs and equipment suppliers
A persistent operational challenge
While end-of-life is becoming more visible in decision-making, the report highlights a significant operational constraint. 87% of organisations say that managing the end-of-life of owned equipment is challenging to some degree.
This disconnect between growing strategic importance and operational capability is central to understanding lifecycle complexity.
What this signals for OEMs and equipment suppliers
The findings suggest that rising expectations around lifecycle management are not yet matched by operational capabilities across many organisations.
This gap may contribute to increasing complexity in how customers evaluate equipment decisions.
A structural gap between intent and execution
The data also points to a structural tension. On one hand, lifecycle considerations are becoming more important. On the other, organisations report challenges in managing end-of-life processes effectively. This gap reflects multiple factors, including:
- the complexity of tracking assets over time
- the coordination required across stakeholders
- the need to meet regulatory and reporting requirements
The findings suggest that lifecycle accountability is increasing but remains unevenly supported by existing structures across many businesses.
Country perspective
The gap between lifecycle expectations and operational execution is reflected in broader patterns observed across the data.
In markets such as the Netherlands, where 45% of organisations report frequent capital constraints, the trade-offs associated with asset management—including end-of-life—may be more visible.
Similarly, uncertainty around future technologies is reported to delay investment decisions in several countries, with 28% of respondents in the Netherlands and Belgium, and 26% in Italy, indicating significant or severe delays.
What this signals for OEMs and equipment suppliers
This gap is not only operational. It may influence how equipment is perceived in procurement decisions, particularly when end-of-life responsibilities are taken into account. This suggests that lifecycle considerations may play a more prominent role alongside performance and cost in how equipment is assessed.
Lifecycle accountability and decision complexity
Taken together, these elements point to a broader development. End-of-life is no longer an isolated operational step. It is increasingly connected to how equipment is selected, managed and evaluated over time. At the same time, the ability to manage this complexity remains uneven. This combination contributes to a situation where lifecycle expectations are rising, while operational constraints remain.
What this signals for OEMs and equipment suppliers
Customers may not only be evaluating what equipment can do. They may also be considering how it can be managed across its full lifecycle — including at end-of-life. This reflects a broader shift in how equipment is assessed, where operational usability over time, and not just initial performance, may play a more prominent role in decision‑making.
Conclusion: a visible but unresolved challenge
What emerges from the data is not a resolved transition, but a gap. End-of-life considerations are becoming more visible in equipment strategy. At the same time, organisations continue to report challenges in managing these processes in practice.
This suggests that lifecycle accountability is increasing in importance, while the operational conditions required to support it are still developing.
Get the full report
Get practical, data‑driven insights into how European businesses are rethinking equipment strategy. Based on research with over 1,000 business leaders across six key sectors, the European Business Equipment Outlook 2026 highlights the trends, challenges and priorities shaping equipment strategy today, and what they mean for businesses looking to stay competitive.