Why teams consistently underestimate integration costs

Most teams underestimate how much integrations actually cost. This article breaks down why that happens, the real complexity, and what to do instead.

The Problem: Wishful Thinking About Integrations

Across hundreds of conversations with product teams, one pattern is clear: teams almost always underestimate integration costs.

The reason is simple. Many assume integrations can be standardized or bought off the shelf. This assumption is false—and leads to misguided objectives, failed integrations, and wasted effort.

Why Teams Think Integrations Are Easy

Market Messaging

Integration platforms often sell the dream of "instant, ready-made connectors." This sounds appealing at the sales stage but breaks quickly:

• Missing functionality
• Unscalable pricing
• Poor customer adoption
• Reliability issues

Sales Pressure

Prospects often ask "Do you integrate with X?" during evaluation. Teams feel they must always say yes, which creates a checklist mentality: integrate with as many systems as possible, as fast as possible.

Lack of Ownership

There’s no official role of "integrations engineer." Few people specialize in understanding dozens of APIs. Because of this, integrations feel like nobody’s responsibility—so teams assume someone must have solved the problem universally.

Why Integrations Cannot Be Standardized

Each product exists to be different. Ticketing systems, for example, vary widely: some optimize for engineering workflows (Linear), others focus on customization (Jira), etc.

When you connect two products, you are connecting two unique systems. The quality of an integration lies in the details: field translations, workflow alignment, etc. There is no universal interface for this.

The Cost of Checklist Thinking

When teams adopt a checklist approach, objectives shift toward speed and cost minimization—ignoring what really matters:

• Does the integration actually work?
• Does it make the product better?
• Do customers adopt and love it?
• Is it reliable and maintainable?

Rushing to check boxes usually results in integrations that don’t get used—still costing time and money.

A Real Example: Ticketing Systems

On paper, you might expect a unified interface. In practice, you’ll hit differences immediately:

• Custom fields: Some customers store key data in custom fields, requiring dynamic mapping.
• Assignments: Some systems allow multiple assignees, others don’t. Some nest teams inside projects or organizations.
• Statuses: Status options vary widely, often customized by end-users.
• Workflows: Triage, escalation, severity handling—all differ between tools.

Building a good integration means designing around these details, experimenting, and listening to customers. There is no shortcut.

The Real Cost: Integrations Are Like Product Development

Think of integrations as building product—only harder. You need to:

1. Do discovery and understand user workflows
2. Design how your product maps to another system
3. Build an MVP and test it and iterate
4. Propagate and educate your user base
5. Maintain and adapt as external APIs change

The twist: you don’t control the external system, yet you must build a smooth experience across both. That’s why integrations are more expensive and complex than most expect.

Common Pitfalls

• Believing in "off-the-shelf" solutions
• Prioritizing speed over adoption
• Ignoring uniqueness of each integration
• Underestimating long-term maintenance

How to Approach Integrations Realistically

1. Treat integrations like core product work
2. Prioritize the systems most critical to your customers
3. Measure adoption, not just delivery
4. Plan for ongoing maintenance

Next Steps

If your team is planning integrations, go in with eyes open. Recognize the real costs and complexity, avoid checklist-driven objectives, and focus on integrations that truly improve your product.

Treat integrations as product work, not as quick technical tasks, and you’ll avoid the trap most teams fall into.

‍