Why Open Hospitality Platforms Win: Lessons from Sonder’s Tech Strategy
FLEXIPASS #TechXpertise Insight Series
Sonder’s bankruptcy has been widely discussed in hospitality, but not just because a well-known brand ran into trouble. It quietly raised a bigger, more strategic question that many hotels, serviced apartments, and hospitality brands are now asking themselves:
Should we rely on one closed “all-in-one” system to run everything, or build on an open, modular platform that plays nicely with others?
Sonder is a useful case study here. Yes, there were financial and strategic issues. But underneath that, their tech approach – a heavy bet on a closed, proprietary system that tried to control every touchpoint – made it much harder to adapt when the environment got complex.
And hospitality is always complex: different channels, partners, systems, and guest expectations that never stop evolving.
So instead of obsessing over the drama, it’s more useful to focus on the lesson: why open, interoperable platforms and best-of-breed tools tend to be safer and smarter than tightly closed, “one size fits all” solutions.
What Sonder’s Approach Tells Us About Closed, All-in-One Systems
Sonder started from a genuinely compelling idea. They wanted to blend apartment-style stays with hotel-like standards, wrap it all in a seamless, tech-enabled guest journey, and run that experience on a single proprietary system that handled bookings, pricing, check-in, operations, and more.
For a while, that unified model helped them move fast. Having everything in one stack can feel efficient and powerful, especially when you’re scaling. There’s one data model, one interface, one “source of truth.”
But the more functionality you centralize inside a closed system, the harder it becomes to connect with the outside world. Integrating deeply with partners, shifting strategy, or upgrading individual parts of your stack starts to feel less like configuration and more like surgery.
Their high-profile partnership with Marriott is a good example. On paper, it sounded great: Sonder properties available to Marriott guests, loyalty points, co-branding. In practice, stitching together a tightly controlled in-house platform with a large, existing ecosystem turned out to be complicated, time-consuming, and expensive.
That’s the core issue with closed, all-in-one approaches. You end up relying on a single roadmap, which means if it slows down, you slow down with it. Integrations become special projects rather than standard capabilities. And any kind of change – a new feature, a new partner, a new business model – starts to feel risky because everything is tightly coupled behind the scenes.
The result is less flexibility at exactly the moment when flexibility is most valuable.
Why Open, Best-of-Breed Platforms Make More Sense
Now imagine a different philosophy: an open platform designed around interoperability and choice.
In this model, you still have a strong core system, like your PMS or CRS. But instead of expecting that one system to do everything, you connect a set of focused tools that are genuinely excellent at one specific area. Your revenue management is handled by a specialist solution that lives and breathes pricing. Guest messaging is powered by a tool that actually understands modern communication channels. Digital access and keys are managed by a platform built for multiple lock types and guest touchpoints. Operations, housekeeping, upselling – each domain gets a product that’s built to go deep, not just tick a box.
All of these components talk to each other through open APIs and standardized data flows. Data doesn’t get trapped; it moves.
This approach tends to work better in practice for a few reasons. First, you get real depth instead of a collection of “just enough” features. A vendor that focuses on one area can keep improving it, while all-in-one platforms often spread their energy thinly across many modules.
Second, you’re no longer completely dependent on a single vendor. If one solution stops fitting your needs – maybe it’s too slow to innovate, or pricing no longer makes sense – you can replace that one piece rather than redesigning your entire architecture.
Third, you can respond to changing guest expectations much faster. When AI tooling matures, or digital access becomes standard, or sustainability reporting becomes mandatory, you don’t need a full replatform. You add, upgrade, or swap tools where needed and plug them into the stack you already have.
Finally, in truly open platforms, integration is not an afterthought. APIs, webhooks, and clean data access are part of the product, not something that gets bolted on later when a big customer asks for it. That’s what makes your stack manageable over years, not just months.
You Don’t Have to Start From Scratch: The Hybrid Path
Of course, most hospitality businesses are not building their tech stack on a blank page. They already have a PMS, a channel manager, POS systems, access control, accounting tools, BI dashboards, and a history of “quick fixes” built on top.
The goal, then, is not to throw everything away. It’s to gradually open things up.
A realistic path is hybrid. You keep the core systems that still serve you well and are stable enough to build on. Then you take a hard look at where the pain really is. Maybe it’s guest access and keys, maybe it’s communication before and during the stay, maybe it’s upselling, reporting, or operational workflows.
Once those priority areas are clear, you start layering in open, best-of-breed tools in those specific domains. Instead of one-off integrations or custom hacks, you connect them properly via APIs, event streams, and standardized data structures.
In other words, you don’t “replace your system” in one big bang. You open it up, step by step.
If Sonder’s technical foundation had been more modular and open, partnering, integrating, or adjusting course would have been less dramatic. The same principle applies to any brand: openness gives you more room to maneuver when circumstances change.
What “Open” Really Means (And What It Doesn’t)
“Open platform” has become a marketing buzzword, so it’s worth clarifying what to look for.
A platform isn’t truly open just because it has an API mentioned in the brochure. What really matters is how that API is used in practice, how accessible it is, and how many other tools are already connected to it.
A few simple questions can reveal a lot. How many third-party products genuinely integrate with this system today, and which ones? Is the API public and properly documented, or do you need special agreements just to see how it works? Does the system support standard events – for example, a “new booking,” “room ready,” “check-in completed,” or “key created” – that other tools can subscribe to without custom development each time? How easy is it to move data into your own BI or data warehouse instead of being locked into built-in dashboards? And if you changed your revenue management tool or access provider tomorrow, would the rest of the stack keep functioning, or would everything unravel?
If the honest answers are vague, complicated, or heavily dependent on custom work, you’re probably still looking at a mostly closed environment, whatever the label says.
“WHEN EVERYTHING IS LOCKED IN ONE BOX, EVEN THE BEST PARTNERSHIPS BECOME AN EXPENSIVE SURGERY.” - Lesson from Sonder
The Big Picture: Build for Change, Not Just for the Brochure
The main takeaway from Sonder’s story isn’t “don’t grow fast” or “don’t innovate.” It’s much more practical: don’t lock your entire operation into one closed box and then hope that box will be perfect forever.
Instead, design your stack so it can evolve. Choose a strong core, then surround it with tools you can upgrade or replace over time. Prioritize platforms and partners that are open by design and comfortable being part of a broader ecosystem, not just the center of their own universe.
The winning tech strategy in hospitality is not one platform that promises to do everything. It’s an open, flexible ecosystem that can bend as your guests, your teams, and your business shift.
Sonder’s journey is a reminder of what happens when that flexibility is missing. Your job now is to make sure your own stack is built to change, not just to impress on a slide.
