During a recent episode of The Flywheel Effect podcast, Brent and I spent time unpacking Clayton Christensen’s classic business book, The Innovator’s Dilemma. As we worked through his framework about how successful companies get disrupted, we realized the pattern runs completely backward in custom integration.
Christensen describes companies that fail because they stick too closely to what works, ignoring emerging technologies until it’s too late. But in our industry, the trap is exactly the opposite. Custom integrators don’t fail because they ignore innovation. They fail because they chase it too aggressively.
The Technology Enthusiast Problem
Let me describe someone you probably know. Maybe it’s you.
This person got into custom integration because they love technology. They were the first among their friends to have a smart home. They read reviews of new products the day they’re announced. They attend trade shows not just for business development, but because they genuinely enjoy seeing what’s coming next.
This enthusiasm was probably an asset early on. Clients hired them because they knew about technologies those clients had never heard of. But somewhere along the way, this strength became a liability.
Also by Matt Bernath: The Three-Pillar Framework
They started installing systems using firmware that hadn’t been fully tested. They speculated about future compatibility that manufacturers promised but hadn’t delivered. They convinced clients to invest in platforms that were technically impressive but operationally unstable. Their clients became unwitting beta testers.
The support calls started piling up, the callbacks multiplied, and they couldn’t understand why clients weren’t more excited about the cutting-edge solutions they were providing.
What Clients Actually Want
Here’s what Brent pointed out during our discussion: Your clients don’t hire you to give them the newest technology. They hire you to give them technology that works.
When you’re excited about a new product, you’re thinking about capabilities and possibilities. Your client is thinking about whether their lights will turn on when they flip the switch. Whether their music will play when they ask for it. Whether they can show their house to guests without something failing embarrassing.
You’re selling innovation. They’re buying reliability. When you deliver innovation at the expense of reliability, you’ve fundamentally misunderstood the transaction.
The Proven Technology Advantage
The most successful integrators I know have made a counterintuitive discovery: They win more business and make more money by being slower to adopt new technologies than their competitors.
They let other integrators work through the firmware bugs. They wait until manufacturers have resolved compatibility issues. They observe which products actually deliver on promises versus which ones require constant workarounds.
This doesn’t mean they’re behind. It means they’re selective. Their reputation is built on systems that work consistently, not systems that showcase bleeding-edge features.
When a client asks about a technology they’ve heard about, these integrators can speak knowledgeably about it. They can explain why they’re not recommending it yet and articulate exactly what criteria they’re waiting for before they’ll stake their reputation on it.
This approach requires being willing to say “no” to a client request if you don’t believe the technology is ready. The integrators who build businesses around proven technologies have fewer callbacks, higher client satisfaction, and more referrals. Their margins are better because they’re not subsidizing manufacturers’ product development.
The Skunk Works Solution
Here’s the dilemma: If you only work with proven technologies, how do you avoid getting left behind when the market actually does shift?
Successful companies need to operate on two timelines simultaneously. They need to optimize their current business around what works today while also exploring what might work tomorrow.
The answer is creating dedicated space for exploration that’s separate from your core operations. Some integrators call this their skunk-works crew, their R&D team, or their innovation lab. What matters is the structure.
This isn’t about having your entire team experiment with new technologies. That’s how you end up with instability across all projects. Instead, you designate specific people or specific time to evaluate emerging solutions without the pressure of delivering perfect results to paying clients.
This might mean one team member spends Friday afternoons testing new products in a demo environment. It might mean dedicating warehouse space to building test systems. It might mean taking on occasional projects specifically to learn about a technology, with clear expectations set with the client.
The key is separation. Your exploration efforts need different metrics, different expectations, and different risk tolerances than your production work. You’re investing in knowledge that might become valuable later.
Vetting With Purpose
The best integrators don’t experiment randomly. They vet new technologies with specific criteria. First, they assess market readiness. Is this solving a problem that mainstream clients actually have, or is this something only enthusiasts want? Second, they evaluate manufacturer stability. Will this company be around in five years to support what they’re selling today? Third, they test real-world reliability. Does this work in the conditions your clients actually live in? Can your technicians troubleshoot it when something goes wrong? Fourth, they consider training requirements. Can your team learn this without disrupting current operations? Finally, they consider the total price including time, support, and opportunity cost of choosing this over proven alternatives.
Most new technologies fail most of these tests. That’s not a reason to stop evaluating them. It’s a reason to wait until they meet your criteria before betting your reputation on them.
When to Make the Jump
When do you move a technology from the skunk works to your core offering? You make the jump when you can stand confidently behind it with your clients.
The signal isn’t perfection. It’s pattern recognition. when you’ve tested the technology enough times to understand its failure modes. When you know which scenarios it handles well and which ones to avoid. When your team can troubleshoot common issues without calling the manufacturer every time.
You’re not waiting for the technology to appear in competitor installations. You’re waiting for your own experience to give you confidence. This might mean three successful test deployments. It might mean six months of living with it in your demo environment.
This approach means you’ll often be among the first to offer something new in your market. But you’ll do it with the confidence that comes from hands-on experience, not manufacturer promises.
The Discipline of Saying No
The hardest part of this approach is developing the discipline to say no to opportunities that don’t meet your criteria. A client asks about a product they saw online. Your gut tells you it’s too new, but they’re excited about it.
A manufacturer offers special pricing to be an early adopter. The economics look attractive, but you haven’t seen enough deployments to know if it’s stable.
A competitor is winning projects by offering technologies you’ve decided aren’t ready yet. You’re losing bids because you seem behind the curve.
Related: Winning by Waiting
These decisions are easier when you have a clear framework. You’re making strategic choices based on what serves your clients and protects your business long-term, not emotional choices based on fear of missing out.
The Long View
Christensen’s core insight is that companies fail by making rational short-term decisions that collectively create long-term problems. For custom integrators, the rational short-term decision is often to chase the newest technology because it creates differentiation and excitement.
The long-term problem is that this approach destroys the reliability that clients actually value. You win projects by being innovative, but you lose clients by being unstable.
The solution is to embrace being slightly behind the curve on adoption while maintaining a dedicated process for staying informed. You let others absorb the early pain while you prepare to move quickly once technologies prove themselves.
This isn’t about being risk averse. You’re choosing where to take risks and where to play it safe. You’re building a business that can sustain success over decades, not just capture attention for a season.
The businesses that thrive aren’t the ones chasing every new technology. They’re the ones that know when to wait, how to evaluate, and when to move decisively once the path is proven.
For more discussions about building sustainable businesses in a rapidly changing industry, check out The Flywheel Effect podcast. Brent and I explore the strategic decisions that separate businesses that thrive from those that chase trends into irrelevance.
