The two main challenges with using <Proprietary Software Solution XYZ> are:
1. Annual costs for "users who needs to know" - Often the procurement of <Proprietary Software Solution XYZ> involves license costs that are proportional to the number of users the organization wishes to have access to the product. To keep the total operational costs of the product down, organizations tend to keep this number at a minimum erring in the side of "only the number of users that are absolutely necessary" rather than "the number of people who's productivity and business functions benefit the most from having access to the data". As a result, the organization's data tends to gets locked-up in the "silo" of the proprietary system not because of any true organizational "need to know" decision, but rather due to cost concerns. In other words, many users in the organization who do have a "need to know" are forced to inefficiently work through a proxy user simply because the organization can't afford to let everyone know whom they would ideally prefer be able to know.
2. Annual costs for "continuous improvements" - Most organizations claim a model of "continuous improvement" to their processes and procedures, however, when software solutions require per-feature and per-task fees to the developer/provider of <XYZ> organization tend to "freeze" or "continuously not improve" the system in order to keep costs down. As a result, most out-of-the-box workflows are primitive and the organization does not have the freedom to adapt over time to their continuously improving processes. In other words, organizations have to "pay to improve" versus having the "freedom to improve".