Skip to main content

Avoiding Tool Sprawl in Your Observability Practice

Anurag Gupta
Calyptia

As enterprises work to implement or improve their observability practices, tool sprawl is a very real phenomenon. A recent Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) survey asked, “how many different tools does your organization use for monitoring, gathering logging and tracing data, and for metrics." The results were intimidating: 72% of respondents indicated that they were using up to nine different tools, and over a fifth said they were using between 10 and 15.

Too often, these tools lack integration and interoperability. Half of the CNCF survey participants identified tool sprawl as one of the biggest challenges to their observability efforts, making it the most common challenge across all organizations.

Tool sprawl can and does happen all across the organization. In this post, though, we'll focus specifically on how and why observability efforts often result in tool sprawl, some of the possible negative consequences of that sprawl, and we'll offer some advice on how to reduce or even avoid sprawl.

What is Tool Sprawl?

Let's begin by declaring what observability tool sprawl is not. It is not simply having more than one observability tool in your stack.

A carpenter needs both a saw and a hammer to build a house. While it may be possible to pound in a nail with a saw, it's inefficient and potentially dangerous. And you'd be hard-pressed to cut lumber with a hammer. The trick is to have the right tools for the right tasks. Each tool has a specific role to play in building the house.

Sprawl, then, is having more tools than required. Sean McDermott, a consultant with decades of experience helping companies manage IT software sprawl, defines it as “the redundancy, wasteful spending and system complexity associated with the unnecessary purchase of new IT tools, and the use or misuse of stagnant, legacy systems."

Observability Seems Particularly Prone to Sprawl

Observability efforts seem particularly vulnerable to tool sprawl. In the same CNCF survey, 4% of respondents indicated using more than 15 tools in their observability stack. Several reasons contribute to this.

1. Observability is still early in its development and adoption. Google searches for observability have quadrupled since mid-2020. A recent survey showed that 58% of respondents were considered "beginners" in their observability journey, while another survey showed that 95% of organizations expected to have a fully implemented observability practice by 2025.

As a result, there is still a lot of uncertainty about best practices. Combine that uncertainty with the large number of new and established vendors attempting to secure their share of the rapidly expanding observability market. and you have a perfect environment for tool sprawl.

2. Observability is not easy, and the explosion of containerized microservices increases the difficulty exponentially. The amount of telemetry data generated by these systems is staggering and still growing. Organizations that adopted a single platform approach to observability (e.g., send everything to Splunk) soon found the consumption-based pricing models of some of those platforms to be prohibitive and went searching for solutions to reduce costs, which often meant adopting another tool.

3. Log, metrics, and traces are often referred to as the three pillars of observability. But these are very different types of data, and tools often specialize in processing and analyzing one or the other. That's fine — remember our earlier analogy about trying to pound a nail wwith a saw — there is nothing wrong with using the best tool for a task. But observability applications often are actually a suite of tools: agents deployed on servers for gathering the data, some sort of system for storing the gathered data, and an application for searching and analyzing the stored data. Often these components are vendor-specific, which sometimes results in multiple data gathering and forwarding apps running on each server sending data to their own vendor-specific backend.

The Consequences of Tool Sprawl

Tool sprawl results in inefficiencies, unnecessary expenses and increased risk. Common problems include:

■ Underutilization of tools that are perfectly capable of doing the job currently handled by another tool.

■ Siloization of teams as groups become entrenched in the idea that only their tool can meet their needs.

■ Increased and unnecessary complexity of the observability pipeline, resulting in greater effort by SREs to ensure that everything continues functioning.

■ Reduced efficiency of the systems being observed as more of their resources are consumed by the tools observing them.

■ Increased downtime due to longer times required to diagnose and repair problems (This is particularly ironic given the purpose of implementing an observability practice).

■ Wasted budget on license renewals, training, implementation, consulting, and integration.

■ Increased security risk as every tool represents a possible attack vector.

Tips for Reducing or Avoiding Sprawl

Thankfully, tool sprawl is neither inevitable nor incurable if it has already infected your observability practice. Here are a few tips.

Know your needs

Identify the specific needs of your team and organization: The first step is to clearly define the goals and objectives of your observability practice and to determine the specific data sources, visualization and analysis tools, and integration processes needed to meet these goals. This will help you to identify the specific tools that will be required and to avoid selecting tools that are not well-suited to your needs.

Evaluate the tools you are using

The next step is to carefully evaluate the tools you are currently using and to determine whether they are meeting the needs of your team and organization. This may involve conducting surveys or user interviews to gather feedback and analyzing data to assess the effectiveness of the tools. Look especially for opportunities for consolidation.

Adopt tools that support open standards

Perhaps the worst mistake an organization can make is adopting tools that do not support open standards. Open standards help organizations avoid vendor lock-in, enabling them to more easily swap out tools that no longer meet their needs. When an organization is locked in to a particular vendor due to the effort required to completely rework its entire observability pipelines and platforms, the organization is at the mercy of the vendor when it comes to contract renewals.

OpenTelemetry has become the standard for telemetry data. The open-source project provides a set of standardized vendor-agnostic SDKs, APIs, and tools for ingesting, transforming, and sending data to an Observability backend (i.e., open source or commercial vendor). At a minimum, you should ensure that any observability backend you adopt supports OpenTelemetry.

Next Steps

Reducing tool sprawl can be painful, especially if you have previously invested in tools whose makers view vendor lock-in as a business strategy. However, the results are worth the effort, assuming you follow the advice above. You are likely to see substantially reduced costs, improved efficiency, faster time to insights, and better visibility into your systems.

Anurag Gupta is Co-Founder of Calyptia

The Latest

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 13, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses hybrid multi-cloud networking strategy ... 

In high-traffic environments, the sheer volume and unpredictable nature of network incidents can quickly overwhelm even the most skilled teams, hindering their ability to react swiftly and effectively, potentially impacting service availability and overall business performance. This is where closed-loop remediation comes into the picture: an IT management concept designed to address the escalating complexity of modern networks ...

In 2025, enterprise workflows are undergoing a seismic shift. Propelled by breakthroughs in generative AI (GenAI), large language models (LLMs), and natural language processing (NLP), a new paradigm is emerging — agentic AI. This technology is not just automating tasks; it's reimagining how organizations make decisions, engage customers, and operate at scale ...

In the early days of the cloud revolution, business leaders perceived cloud services as a means of sidelining IT organizations. IT was too slow, too expensive, or incapable of supporting new technologies. With a team of developers, line of business managers could deploy new applications and services in the cloud. IT has been fighting to retake control ever since. Today, IT is back in the driver's seat, according to new research by Enterprise Management Associates (EMA) ...

In today's fast-paced and increasingly complex network environments, Network Operations Centers (NOCs) are the backbone of ensuring continuous uptime, smooth service delivery, and rapid issue resolution. However, the challenges faced by NOC teams are only growing. In a recent study, 78% state network complexity has grown significantly over the last few years while 84% regularly learn about network issues from users. It is imperative we adopt a new approach to managing today's network experiences ...

Image
Broadcom

From growing reliance on FinOps teams to the increasing attention on artificial intelligence (AI), and software licensing, the Flexera 2025 State of the Cloud Report digs into how organizations are improving cloud spend efficiency, while tackling the complexities of emerging technologies ...

Today, organizations are generating and processing more data than ever before. From training AI models to running complex analytics, massive datasets have become the backbone of innovation. However, as businesses embrace the cloud for its scalability and flexibility, a new challenge arises: managing the soaring costs of storing and processing this data ...

Despite the frustrations, every engineer we spoke with ultimately affirmed the value and power of OpenTelemetry. The "sucks" moments are often the flip side of its greatest strengths ... Part 2 of this blog covers the powerful advantages and breakthroughs — the "OTel Rocks" moments ...

OpenTelemetry (OTel) arrived with a grand promise: a unified, vendor-neutral standard for observability data (traces, metrics, logs) that would free engineers from vendor lock-in and provide deeper insights into complex systems ... No powerful technology comes without its challenges, and OpenTelemetry is no exception. The engineers we spoke with were frank about the friction points they've encountered ...

Enterprises are turning to AI-powered software platforms to make IT management more intelligent and ensure their systems and technology meet business needs for efficiency, lowers costs and innovation, according to new research from Information Services Group ...

Avoiding Tool Sprawl in Your Observability Practice

Anurag Gupta
Calyptia

As enterprises work to implement or improve their observability practices, tool sprawl is a very real phenomenon. A recent Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) survey asked, “how many different tools does your organization use for monitoring, gathering logging and tracing data, and for metrics." The results were intimidating: 72% of respondents indicated that they were using up to nine different tools, and over a fifth said they were using between 10 and 15.

Too often, these tools lack integration and interoperability. Half of the CNCF survey participants identified tool sprawl as one of the biggest challenges to their observability efforts, making it the most common challenge across all organizations.

Tool sprawl can and does happen all across the organization. In this post, though, we'll focus specifically on how and why observability efforts often result in tool sprawl, some of the possible negative consequences of that sprawl, and we'll offer some advice on how to reduce or even avoid sprawl.

What is Tool Sprawl?

Let's begin by declaring what observability tool sprawl is not. It is not simply having more than one observability tool in your stack.

A carpenter needs both a saw and a hammer to build a house. While it may be possible to pound in a nail with a saw, it's inefficient and potentially dangerous. And you'd be hard-pressed to cut lumber with a hammer. The trick is to have the right tools for the right tasks. Each tool has a specific role to play in building the house.

Sprawl, then, is having more tools than required. Sean McDermott, a consultant with decades of experience helping companies manage IT software sprawl, defines it as “the redundancy, wasteful spending and system complexity associated with the unnecessary purchase of new IT tools, and the use or misuse of stagnant, legacy systems."

Observability Seems Particularly Prone to Sprawl

Observability efforts seem particularly vulnerable to tool sprawl. In the same CNCF survey, 4% of respondents indicated using more than 15 tools in their observability stack. Several reasons contribute to this.

1. Observability is still early in its development and adoption. Google searches for observability have quadrupled since mid-2020. A recent survey showed that 58% of respondents were considered "beginners" in their observability journey, while another survey showed that 95% of organizations expected to have a fully implemented observability practice by 2025.

As a result, there is still a lot of uncertainty about best practices. Combine that uncertainty with the large number of new and established vendors attempting to secure their share of the rapidly expanding observability market. and you have a perfect environment for tool sprawl.

2. Observability is not easy, and the explosion of containerized microservices increases the difficulty exponentially. The amount of telemetry data generated by these systems is staggering and still growing. Organizations that adopted a single platform approach to observability (e.g., send everything to Splunk) soon found the consumption-based pricing models of some of those platforms to be prohibitive and went searching for solutions to reduce costs, which often meant adopting another tool.

3. Log, metrics, and traces are often referred to as the three pillars of observability. But these are very different types of data, and tools often specialize in processing and analyzing one or the other. That's fine — remember our earlier analogy about trying to pound a nail wwith a saw — there is nothing wrong with using the best tool for a task. But observability applications often are actually a suite of tools: agents deployed on servers for gathering the data, some sort of system for storing the gathered data, and an application for searching and analyzing the stored data. Often these components are vendor-specific, which sometimes results in multiple data gathering and forwarding apps running on each server sending data to their own vendor-specific backend.

The Consequences of Tool Sprawl

Tool sprawl results in inefficiencies, unnecessary expenses and increased risk. Common problems include:

■ Underutilization of tools that are perfectly capable of doing the job currently handled by another tool.

■ Siloization of teams as groups become entrenched in the idea that only their tool can meet their needs.

■ Increased and unnecessary complexity of the observability pipeline, resulting in greater effort by SREs to ensure that everything continues functioning.

■ Reduced efficiency of the systems being observed as more of their resources are consumed by the tools observing them.

■ Increased downtime due to longer times required to diagnose and repair problems (This is particularly ironic given the purpose of implementing an observability practice).

■ Wasted budget on license renewals, training, implementation, consulting, and integration.

■ Increased security risk as every tool represents a possible attack vector.

Tips for Reducing or Avoiding Sprawl

Thankfully, tool sprawl is neither inevitable nor incurable if it has already infected your observability practice. Here are a few tips.

Know your needs

Identify the specific needs of your team and organization: The first step is to clearly define the goals and objectives of your observability practice and to determine the specific data sources, visualization and analysis tools, and integration processes needed to meet these goals. This will help you to identify the specific tools that will be required and to avoid selecting tools that are not well-suited to your needs.

Evaluate the tools you are using

The next step is to carefully evaluate the tools you are currently using and to determine whether they are meeting the needs of your team and organization. This may involve conducting surveys or user interviews to gather feedback and analyzing data to assess the effectiveness of the tools. Look especially for opportunities for consolidation.

Adopt tools that support open standards

Perhaps the worst mistake an organization can make is adopting tools that do not support open standards. Open standards help organizations avoid vendor lock-in, enabling them to more easily swap out tools that no longer meet their needs. When an organization is locked in to a particular vendor due to the effort required to completely rework its entire observability pipelines and platforms, the organization is at the mercy of the vendor when it comes to contract renewals.

OpenTelemetry has become the standard for telemetry data. The open-source project provides a set of standardized vendor-agnostic SDKs, APIs, and tools for ingesting, transforming, and sending data to an Observability backend (i.e., open source or commercial vendor). At a minimum, you should ensure that any observability backend you adopt supports OpenTelemetry.

Next Steps

Reducing tool sprawl can be painful, especially if you have previously invested in tools whose makers view vendor lock-in as a business strategy. However, the results are worth the effort, assuming you follow the advice above. You are likely to see substantially reduced costs, improved efficiency, faster time to insights, and better visibility into your systems.

Anurag Gupta is Co-Founder of Calyptia

The Latest

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 13, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses hybrid multi-cloud networking strategy ... 

In high-traffic environments, the sheer volume and unpredictable nature of network incidents can quickly overwhelm even the most skilled teams, hindering their ability to react swiftly and effectively, potentially impacting service availability and overall business performance. This is where closed-loop remediation comes into the picture: an IT management concept designed to address the escalating complexity of modern networks ...

In 2025, enterprise workflows are undergoing a seismic shift. Propelled by breakthroughs in generative AI (GenAI), large language models (LLMs), and natural language processing (NLP), a new paradigm is emerging — agentic AI. This technology is not just automating tasks; it's reimagining how organizations make decisions, engage customers, and operate at scale ...

In the early days of the cloud revolution, business leaders perceived cloud services as a means of sidelining IT organizations. IT was too slow, too expensive, or incapable of supporting new technologies. With a team of developers, line of business managers could deploy new applications and services in the cloud. IT has been fighting to retake control ever since. Today, IT is back in the driver's seat, according to new research by Enterprise Management Associates (EMA) ...

In today's fast-paced and increasingly complex network environments, Network Operations Centers (NOCs) are the backbone of ensuring continuous uptime, smooth service delivery, and rapid issue resolution. However, the challenges faced by NOC teams are only growing. In a recent study, 78% state network complexity has grown significantly over the last few years while 84% regularly learn about network issues from users. It is imperative we adopt a new approach to managing today's network experiences ...

Image
Broadcom

From growing reliance on FinOps teams to the increasing attention on artificial intelligence (AI), and software licensing, the Flexera 2025 State of the Cloud Report digs into how organizations are improving cloud spend efficiency, while tackling the complexities of emerging technologies ...

Today, organizations are generating and processing more data than ever before. From training AI models to running complex analytics, massive datasets have become the backbone of innovation. However, as businesses embrace the cloud for its scalability and flexibility, a new challenge arises: managing the soaring costs of storing and processing this data ...

Despite the frustrations, every engineer we spoke with ultimately affirmed the value and power of OpenTelemetry. The "sucks" moments are often the flip side of its greatest strengths ... Part 2 of this blog covers the powerful advantages and breakthroughs — the "OTel Rocks" moments ...

OpenTelemetry (OTel) arrived with a grand promise: a unified, vendor-neutral standard for observability data (traces, metrics, logs) that would free engineers from vendor lock-in and provide deeper insights into complex systems ... No powerful technology comes without its challenges, and OpenTelemetry is no exception. The engineers we spoke with were frank about the friction points they've encountered ...

Enterprises are turning to AI-powered software platforms to make IT management more intelligent and ensure their systems and technology meet business needs for efficiency, lowers costs and innovation, according to new research from Information Services Group ...