Security Consolidation Improves Efficiency, Threat Mitigation
Enterprises are shifting toward security tool consolidation as cyberthreats grow in complexity, opting for integrated platforms over fragmented, multi-vendor solutions.
A study from IBM and Palo Alto Networks suggests this approach can significantly improve cyber resilience and operational efficiency while reducing costs.
The research, conducted by IBM’s Institute for Business Value in collaboration with Oxford Economics, surveyed over 1,000 executives across 21 industries and 18 countries.
The findings indicated organizations that consolidate security tools into integrated platforms are seeing faster incident detection, quicker threat mitigation and higher returns on investment.
The study found that organizations juggle an average of 83 different security tools from 29 vendors, leading to operational inefficiencies and security blind spots.
More than half (52%) of executives surveyed said this fragmentation limits their ability to address cyberthreats effectively.
Additionally, 74% of executives reported that their security teams are overburdened, struggling to manage excessive workloads due to the complexity of disparate security solutions.
Eighty percent of respondents said they also face pressure to cut security costs, even as cyberattacks grow in scale and sophistication.
The report also suggested organizations with disjointed security stacks take significantly longer to detect and contain threats, with enterprises relying on integrated security platforms identifying threats 74 days faster and containing them 84 days sooner than those using a patchwork of separate tools.
The shift toward “platformization”, where security tools are consolidated into an integrated system, has been met with both enthusiasm and skepticism.
While some security professionals worry about vendor lock-in, the study suggested platform adopters achieve faster threat response times, improved risk management and a more efficient security workforce.
Improved ROI, Cost Savings
IBM’s research also found that organizations using security platforms achieve an average return on investment (ROI) of 101%, compared to just 28% for companies sticking with fragmented security stacks.
Despite consolidating tools and spending less overall, platform adopters generated four times greater ROI than non-adopters.
Beyond cost savings, the study indicates that security teams using integrated platforms see security as a value generator, rather than just a cost center.
Among platform adopters, 96% of security executives viewed security as a business enabler, compared to only 8% of those relying on fragmented tools.
Trey Ford, CISO at Bugcrowd noted there is always an ebb and flow in terms of best-of-breed vs. fully integrated platforms.
“The question CISOs always ask is ‘how hard is this to integrate, operationalize and maintain in my platform’,” he said. “The hope is these integrated platforms play well with others.”
He added technologists are always wrestling with the question of “good enough” – fully integrated solutions move some level of that baseline efficacy decision-making to the platform provider.
“On the upside, operational resilience is improved where integrations and detections are centrally managed by the vendor,” he said.
However, the “best of breed” in any given space will not have clean integrations, which adds technical debt and maintenance to security engineering and operations planning and maintenance, which needs budgeting for.
David Lindner, CISO of Contrast Security said while security tool consolidation offers clear benefits, including streamlined workflows, simplified management and faster incident response, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution.
He said while integration can improve efficiency, reducing tools without fully assessing coverage gaps can create new vulnerabilities.
“Tool sprawl is a real problem — it makes everything more complex, obscures visibility and slows down response times,” Lindner said.
However, each tool typically serves a specific purpose, and blindly eliminating solutions for the sake of consolidation can weaken an organization’s defenses.
He advised organizations to conduct comprehensive gap analyses before making any shifts, ensuring security posture improvements rather than just faster response times to a subset of threats.
While vendor consolidation can reduce costs and simplify management, it also introduces risks.
“Relying on a single vendor creates a potential single point of failure and limits access to best-of-breed solutions for specialized security functions,” Lindner said.
Lindner also urged CISOs to remain skeptical of vendor marketing hype and prioritize independent testing before committing to any platform.
“Security is never one-size-fits-all,” he said. “Don’t fall for the ‘easy button’—trading real security for perceived simplicity is a dangerous gamble.”
