5 Reasons Why Your Platform Engineering Initiative is Failing (and How to Fix It)
From misaligned priorities to stakeholder breakdowns—learn how to avoid platform failure.
Platforms fail for all sorts of reasons. Imagine a rusted-out bus, once gleaming and full of promise, now abandoned on the side of the road—its wheels frozen, its purpose forgotten. Like that bus, platform engineering initiatives often begin with grand ambitions to serve the entire organisation but get abandoned due to missteps and overlooked challenges. From false starts to silent failures, too many teams find themselves on the path to obsolescence before they’ve even had a chance to deliver. This article explores the most common reasons why platform engineering efforts stall—and how to keep yours from breaking down.
Check Engine: The False Starts of Platform Engineering
Many platform engineering teams stumble before they ever gain momentum, often due to preventable missteps. One of the most common pitfalls is failing to establish a solid business case. Without a compelling narrative that clearly articulates the platform’s value, it’s nearly impossible to secure the buy-in and resources needed to succeed.
Equally problematic is the lack of a strong stakeholder network. Without early collaboration, especially with a dedicated launch partner, teams miss out on crucial feedback that can shape the platform’s development. Misalignment among stakeholders often leads to a muddled vision, which results in stalled progress.
Executive sponsorship is another critical element. Without high-level backing, platforms can easily get bogged down in organizational inertia, lacking the visibility and authority to push through roadblocks. A champion at the executive level provides the resources and support needed to sustain momentum.
Lastly, many teams fall into the trap of over-engineering. Trying to solve every potential problem from the start—often referred to as “boiling the ocean”—leads to endless design phases with little to show for it. Starting small and iterating is a more practical approach.
Perfectionism also plays a role in false starts. Teams often aim to automate everything, rather than recognizing the value of launching early with some manual processes in place. The obsession with a flawless product delays the platform’s ability to deliver value—and prevents essential learning from real-world use.
Empty Seats: Solutions in Search of Problems
Platform engineering teams often fall into the trap of building impressive solutions that solve the wrong problems—or worse, no problems at all. One key misstep is failing to identify a core group of initial users. Without these early adopters to guide development, the platform risks becoming disconnected from real business needs, drifting into irrelevance.
An unclear understanding of the business problems at hand further compounds this issue. Teams that jump into development without fully grasping the value stream often focus on the wrong areas, delivering platforms that might be technically sound but provide little practical value.
Another common mistake is prioritizing technology over people. Treating the platform like a science experiment, rather than a product designed for users, leaves critical insights on the table. Engaging with users early and often ensures that the platform aligns with actual needs rather than theoretical possibilities.
Speed is also crucial. Platforms that don’t deliver incremental value early on risk losing user engagement. When teams take too long to show tangible benefits, users may lose patience and build their own ad hoc solutions, splintering efforts and wasting resources.
Lastly, the “Not-Invented-Here” syndrome can be a silent killer. When teams dismiss existing off-the-shelf solutions in favor of building everything from scratch, they waste time and resources reinventing the wheel. Instead, leveraging proven tools can free up teams to focus on creating unique value.
Are We There Yet? When Communication Breaks Down
One of the most insidious ways platform engineering efforts fail is through silent breakdowns in communication. Without a clear, evolving narrative or compelling metrics that demonstrate the platform’s value, it’s easy for stakeholders to lose interest.
Frequent progress updates are crucial to maintaining engagement. When teams fail to provide them, stakeholders often drift away, leading to fragmented efforts as different groups start building their own solutions—resulting in wasted time and duplicated work. The damage is more than a waste of resources; it fragments the focus and energy needed to drive change in large businesses.
Advocacy is essential to counteract Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) within the business. Without champions promoting the platform’s benefits, skepticism can grow unchecked. Moreover, a poor user experience, often due to insufficient documentation and lack of support, can quickly tarnish the platform’s reputation.
Finally, platforms that neglect marketing and community-building efforts risk fading into obscurity. Even a well-designed system can fail if no one knows how to use it or understands its benefits. By engaging users early, delivering clear value, and creating advocates, teams can avoid these silent failures and keep their platform on a path to success.
Maintenance Matters: Avoiding Flat Tires on the Road to Growth
After the initial launch, platform engineering teams often face new challenges as they try to scale. One common issue is misaligned priorities. Teams that fail to adapt as the platform grows may continue focusing on early-stage needs, neglecting the broader user base required for long-term success. On the flip side, listening too much to user feedback can lead to over-engineered, overly complex solutions—what some call “Homer’s car,” a product designed to please everyone but satisfies no one.
Adapting priorities is essential to maintaining momentum. Without flexibility, teams risk missing out on the critical majority needed for widespread adoption, often described in the diffusion of innovation curve. A platform that only serves early adopters will struggle to gain mass acceptance without strategic adjustments.
Aggressive change tactics, which may have worked initially, can become counterproductive as the platform scales. Teams that push changes too hard without collaboration often create resistance and friction within the organization. Sustainable growth requires working with stakeholders, not against them.
Lastly, successful scaling isn’t just about technical improvements; it also involves organizational and cultural shifts. Transitioning from siloed teams to a centrally managed platform requires a rethinking of how teams collaborate. Without addressing these broader changes, even the most advanced platform can falter.
The Journey of a Thousand Miles
As platform engineering teams move beyond their first year, the initial excitement fades, and what were once groundbreaking benefits become the new normal.
One of the biggest threats at this stage is being overwhelmed by your own success. Without a sustainable funding model beyond the initial project phase, maintaining momentum becomes increasingly difficult.
A surge of new demands and mounting technical debt can slow progress to a crawl, making it difficult for the team to keep delivering value. If not actively managed, technical debt becomes a roadblock, stalling progress or leading to critical failures that erode trust in the platform.
Platform teams themselves can also lose trust in the platform too. Poor task or team management may go unnoticed when engineers are working on new, exciting features. New challenges emerge for managers though when the day-to-day efforts begin to centre around user support and bug fixes. Engineers must continue to feel a sense of forward momentum to remain engaged.
Without the right support, burnout becomes inevitable, threatening the platform’s long-term viability.