I usually reserve my articles for reflections on corporate governance topics or insights from my teaching at the University of St.Gallen. Today, however, I want to share a different observation: one rooted in how we preserve and access knowledge over time.
In an era of proliferating tools and proprietary platforms, we risk fragmenting our information across silos that may disappear, become obsolete or lock our data behind closed systems, which can cause significant costs (“lock-in costs”, “switching costs”). This is why the “file over app” philosophy has resonated with me so strongly – not merely as a technical preference, but as a principled approach to knowledge management that aligns with long-term accessibility, portability and intellectual continuity. As a strong advocate of the paperless office and digitalization in all possible parts of life and business, I have been following this philosophy for many years; I just did not know until recently – when I stumbled over Steph Ango’s exposition of this concept – that this was discussed under the very apt slogan “file over app”.
The core idea of “file over app” is simple yet profound: treat files – open, interoperable, enduring formats – as the primary repository of your work, and consider applications as transient interfaces that help you work with those files. This mindset encourages us to own our data, rather than rent it from an ecosystem that might change without notice.
Steph Ango (whom some will know as the CEO of Obsidian) has articulated this philosophy with eloquence and clarity. While I personally do not use Obsidian, I deeply appreciate and endorse the principle that files should outlast applications. This resonates with a broader, almost philosophical commitment to preserving intellectual capital in forms that remain usable, searchable and transferable across contexts and time.
In domains ranging from legal practice and academic research to entrepreneurship and personal productivity, the way we store and structure information matters. Opting for file-centric workflows does not mean rejecting innovation; it means anchoring it in durability and open standards.
Boards of directors should also keep this in mind. Many use specialized boardroom portals or SaaS providers. There is nothing wrong with that – but information should be stored in formats (e.g., PDF) that will remain accessible if those portals or providers close or become unavailable.
My approach and recommendations: