Why Integration Stacks Fail at Scale

Most enterprise integration stacks don’t start out fragile.

They’re built to solve real problems. You need to move faster. You need access to data and answers you couldn’t get before. So, you add a point solution here, build a custom pipeline there, and even accept a bit of complexity to keep things moving as the business grows.  

At the time, progress feels like it matters more than polish.  

And for a while, everything works.

Until it doesn’t.

Data still flows and reports get delivered. From the outside, nothing feels broken.  

The trouble starts later when the company starts to grow, but your integration stack is now supporting far more people and systems than it was ever designed to handle.

What follows isn’t a sudden failure. It’s something quieter: a gradual loss of margin for error. And that’s how integration problems catch enterprises off guard: not as broken systems, but as fragile ones.

The reality of integration stacks in 2026

If you talk to people who actually keep modern data stacks running (or maybe you’re one of them), you hear a similar story again and again: Expectations grow faster than capacity.  

Teams are asked to ingest more data, support more use cases, and respond to more stakeholders. Often, they’re doing it with fewer people and less time.  

You see this tension clearly where practitioners talk openly. Recently on Reddit, a user asked, “What’s currently the biggest bottleneck in your data stack?” The most popular answer, with 239 upvotes, was: “Being a one person department.” Another commenter added that the understaffing was “relative to dev backlog, aspirations, and potential.” (Note: We recorded upvotes on January 29, 2026.)
‍

Taken together, these comments point to the same problem: Integration keeps expanding, but the teams responsible for it don’t.  

The result isn’t failure so much as sustained pressure. A small group of people is responsible for keeping an increasingly complex system running, while the scope of what that system supports continues to grow.    

Scale quietly changed the rules

At first, integration feels manageable.  

You bring new systems online. New teams get access to data. From a leadership perspective, things look like they’re working. Requests are getting fulfilled, and the stack is delivering value.

Then the company grows.

More people rely on the same metrics. More decisions depend on shared definitions. And, without anyone making a single wrong decision, the cost of getting something wrong goes up.

This is the quiet rule change that scale introduces. Integration stops being a series of projects and becomes shared infrastructure. Old pipelines keep running even as new ones are added. What once felt like optional cleanup becomes risky to touch.

At this stage, integration hasn’t failed, but it has moved onto the business’s critical path.

The stack still works. It just has far less room for error than it used to. That’s what scale changes.

Change is where cracks first appear

An early warning sign that integration is becoming a problem usually isn’t volume. It’s change, when shifts in systems or requirements start to grow faster than your team’s ability to respond.

Systems get replaced or upgraded. Definitions evolve. Teams reorganize. Some of this change is planned, but a lot of it isn’t. And your integration stacks are downstream of all of it.

This is where things start to feel harder to manage. Not because anything has failed outright, but because certainty begins to slip. Work that felt routine now comes with hesitation. Even small updates take longer, because you’re no longer completely sure what they might affect.

You see this reflected in how practitioners talk about their day-to-day work. In one Reddit thread, a user summed it up with a single line: "Insane requirements, constant email.”  
‍

What these stories describe isn’t chaos but a system trying to adapt to constant change and uncertainty.

Logic that once felt safe now has to handle edge cases. Assumptions baked into transformations stop holding, not because they were wrong, but because the environment around them changed.

And because integration connects so many systems, problems don’t show up as obvious failures. They surface as uncertainty.  

When integration becomes an enterprise risk

This is the point where integration stops being a technical concern and starts affecting the business. Problems don’t appear all at once. Rather, they unfold—first as lost trust, then as slower execution, and eventually as real risk.

Trust breaks before systems do

When integration starts to strain, the first thing that breaks isn’t usually a pipeline. It’s trust.  

The same question produces different answers depending on who you ask. Maybe reports don’t quite line up. Or, numbers need explaining before they can be used. Leaders start asking which version is correct, and why it takes so long to find out.

From the outside, this can look like a data quality issue. But underneath, it’s often integration problem. Data is moving through too many paths. Definitions drift as teams adapt systems independently. Context gets lost as transformations pile up across tools and pipelines.

Practitioners inside large enterprises describe it this way: Historical data exists in multiple places, shaped by different teams, with no single version everyone agrees on.

That’s a problem because, as one practitioner on Reddit put it, before organizations can move on to advanced initiatives like AI agents or automation, they first have to untangle fragmented systems and years of accumulated integration debt.  
‍

While that untangling happens, confidence erodes. Teams hesitate before acting on numbers. Data requires explanation before it earns trust. The system still runs, but belief in it starts to flag.

Operational drag starts slowing down your business

When integration starts to strain, the impact shows up as a drag.    

Simple changes take longer. New requests pile up. Teams spend more time keeping things running than improving them. From the outside, the stack still looks fine. From the inside, progress feels heavier than it should.

One data practitioner described trying to simplify ingestion at scale using modern integration tools, only to find that as data volume grew and requirements became more specific, each tool hit a limit. To keep things working, the team rebuilt logic around the tool.
‍

The effort didn’t go away. It just moved.  

Teams stay busy, but output slows. Fewer people feel confident touching critical pipelines, and knowledge concentrates in a small group, because they’re the only ones who understand how everything fits together.  

Fragility turns into risk

At a certain point, integration problems stop feeling inconvenient and start feeling risky.

While systems become dependent on individual knowledge instead of shared understanding, the margin for error disappears. Data moves through more tools and workarounds, and no one has a complete picture anymore of how information flows and why.

This is where shortcuts come back to bite. Security teams struggle to trace who has access to what. Compliance questions take longer to answer. Simple requests turn into investigations because no one can confidently explain how the data got there.

From a leadership perspective, this is the shift that matters most. Integration is no longer just about delivery. It’s also about credibility, accountability, and risk.

Nothing may be on fire, but the business no longer has room for mistakes.  

Rethinking integration as a foundation, not plumbing

The good news is that these problems aren’t inevitable. Organizations that scale successfully don’t abandon integration. Rather, they rethink how it’s designed as the business grows.

Instead of treating integration like plumbing—something that stays out of the way as long as it’s running—they treat it as a foundation: shared infrastructure designed to carry more weight as the organization scales.

That doesn’t require starting over. It means focusing on a small set of changes that make integration more reliable, more visible, and easier to govern as complexity increases.

At Domo, we see three principles show up consistently in organizations that scale integration well:

• Shared, not scattered ‍
• Visibility, governance, and security ‍
• Built for the whole organization

1. Shared, not scattered

At scale, integration can’t live in dozens of disconnected pipelines owned in isolation. That’s how blind spots form, knowledge gets trapped, and small changes turn into big surprises.

At the same time, locking everything down too tightly creates a different problem. Workarounds pop up, and shadow systems appear.

A foundation requires a shared approach: common patterns, shared ownership, and enough flexibility for teams to move without putting the business at risk.

2. Trust comes from visibility, not heroics

Reliable data doesn’t come from asking teams to be more careful or adding more tools. It comes from visibility into how data moves, how it changes, and who can access it and why.    

Governance, security, and observability aren’t overhead at this stage. They’re what make speed possible without breaking trust. They replace heroics with confidence.

3. Built for the whole organization

Integration isn’t just about feeding dashboards. It supports financial reporting, operations, compliance, and increasingly, AI.  

That’s why integration has to serve the entire organization. It needs to be dependable enough to support what comes next, not just what’s already running.

The question leaders should be asking

Organizations that scale successfully recognize when their integration approach needs to evolve before fragility becomes a constraint.

The real test is whether your integration stack is designed as shared infrastructure: dependable under growth, resilient to change, and trusted across the business.

In other words, it’s whether your stack is built like plumbing…or like a foundation.

If you're curious how a better solution could look, explore how Domo does data integration.