FIELD GUIDE/Vendors & Contracts

Two technology vendors are blaming each other. How do I figure out who actually owns the problem?

When two vendors point at each other, the problem usually lives at the boundary between their systems. Identifying that boundary — and who is responsible for it — is the practical path forward.

The short version

Stop trying to get the vendors to agree with each other. Instead, focus on identifying exactly where the failure is occurring — which system, which component, which handoff point. Once you know where the problem lives, it becomes much harder for either vendor to credibly claim it belongs to the other.

Why this happens

Technology systems at small businesses are rarely built by a single vendor. A website might be hosted by one company, built by another, and use email from a third. A business phone system might integrate with a CRM from a different vendor. When something breaks at the point where two systems connect, each vendor's support team sees only their side of the boundary — and their natural inclination is to confirm that their side is working correctly and suggest the problem is elsewhere.

This isn't always bad faith. Support teams are trained to diagnose their own systems. They often genuinely don't have visibility into what the other vendor's system is doing. But the result for you is the same: two vendors, each saying their system is fine, and a problem that isn't getting fixed.

Identify the boundary

The most useful thing you can do is describe the failure precisely. Not "email isn't working" or "the integration is broken" — but specifically what is happening, at what step, and what the expected behavior would be. Where does the data or process leave one system and enter the other? What is each system supposed to do at that handoff? What is actually happening instead?

If you can get a specific error message, a log entry, or a timestamp for when the failure occurs, that information is far more useful than a general description of the symptom. Error messages often name the system or component that generated them — which is frequently the system where the problem actually lives, regardless of what either vendor claims.

Ask each vendor a specific question

Rather than asking each vendor to diagnose the problem, ask them a specific, bounded question about their own system. "Can you confirm that your system is successfully sending the data to [endpoint] at [time], and show me the log entry?" or "Can you confirm that your system received the request and what response it returned?" A vendor who can answer that question with evidence has demonstrated their side is working. A vendor who cannot answer it — or who deflects to the other vendor without providing evidence — has identified where to look next.

Who owns the integration?

Many integration problems live in the configuration layer — the settings that tell one system how to talk to the other. That configuration was set up by someone: the vendor who built the integration, the IT provider who connected the systems, or someone internally. Whoever set it up is usually the right person to diagnose it, because they understand both sides of the connection.

If the integration was set up by a vendor who is no longer involved, or if nobody currently knows who configured it, that's a separate problem worth surfacing. An integration that nobody understands and nobody owns is a dependency waiting to fail permanently.

Escalation within each vendor

Front-line support teams at most vendors are trained to handle common issues within their own system. Cross-vendor integration problems are often outside their scope. If you've been working with first-level support and getting nowhere, ask to escalate to a technical specialist or an integrations team. Frame the request specifically: "I need someone who can review the API logs for this specific transaction and confirm what your system sent or received."

Document everything

Keep a written record of what each vendor has told you, when, and what evidence they provided. This serves two purposes. It prevents each vendor from repeating the same deflection without accountability. And if the situation escalates — to a formal support case, a contract dispute, or a decision to replace one of the vendors — the documentation is the foundation of that conversation.

Web Relevant helps organizations navigate exactly this kind of situation — identifying where a failure is actually occurring, working with vendors to get specific answers, and determining whether the problem is a configuration issue, a vendor failure, or a gap in how the systems were set up. If you're stuck in a loop between two vendors, get in touch.