a new provider or to switch a provider in the coming year. The top reason cited by those preparing to switch was “the need to respond to threats,” cited by 55 percent of respondents and compounded by the 38 percent that said it was “the need to secure AI systems.” As the Hoffman Agency noted, both responses were chosen at a higher rate than the need to reduce costs or cope with talent shortages. Also worth noting, while 31 percent of organizations said they are looking to change providers because their current provider isn’t good enough, dissatisfaction was the least popular driver for new cybersecurity purchases. This tends to suggest that a provider often may get little indication when a customer is about the churn, emphasizing the importance of proactive customer service and quality control. When asked to consider the attributes that have the biggest impact on the selection of a vendor, the top answers included “value for the money” and “simple and easy to integrate,” both named by nine out of 10 respondents, followed by evidence of delivering for similar business (87 percent) and flexible in adjusting to needs (84 percent). In terms of investment moving forward, the survey revealed some significant shifts in priorities. Of course, “AI security,” which only 8 percent invested in last year, was the top area of intended purchase for the coming 12 months, cited by 30 percent of respondents. Likewise, data security posture management took a leap in importance, while network security and email security, and to a lesser degree endpoint security, went from top priorities to the bottom of the list. Certainly, some of the dip in those key areas of protection is due to assumptions that prior investments have taken care of those threat vectors. Even so, partners and providers cannot assume that a high-demand or low-demand service last year will have the same demand during the next 12 months. Any shift in security product selection moving forward will be commensurate with the shifts in how bad guys are now attacking corporate resources. A traditional approach to dealing with emerging threats has been to deploy another point tool, argued Jeannine Edwards, senior director, Cynet Community, in the company’s Global AI Security Readiness Report. “This leads to more noise, alert fatigue, tooling customization and fragmented defense,” she continued. “Today’s attacks are paths, not points.” Modern attacks, as Cynet executives pointed out, are now comprised 21 SUMMER 2026 | CHANNELVISION
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTg4Njc=