Technology adoption is not a linear path; it follows a predictable S-curve—a concept well understood by those who have navigated shifts in infrastructure, tooling, and process modernization. 

Yet, many engineering leaders and DevOps heads underestimate the true impact of delaying necessary technological shifts, often misallocating valuable engineering time to patch over outdated systems rather than investing in the future.

In many cases, this delay isn’t just a technical issue — it’s a communication and leadership challenge. Securing executive buy-in for new technology requires articulating the long-term ROI, mitigating perceived risks, and aligning technology adoption with business goals. Without proactive conversations at the leadership level, technology decisions get deferred, and teams find themselves stuck in a cycle of inefficiency, constantly firefighting rather than innovating.

The S-Curve of Technology Adoption

Every technology follows an S-curve when mapped against Return on Investment (ROI) over time. 

The early phase is deceptively challenging. Companies initially experience limited ROI as they pay for the software, invest in learning, and undergo a configuration period. This is the ‘pain before the gain’ — a necessary investment in capability. 

Once the team overcomes this ramp-up period, the ROI phase kicks in, delivering massive productivity improvements, efficiency gains, and competitive advantages. But no technology remains optimal forever. Eventually, it reaches its capacity ceiling. The rate of return slows, and as newer, more capable technologies emerge, the older technology begins to deliver diminishing — sometimes even negative — returns. 

What many fail to recognize is that this isn’t a single S-curve. Instead, it’s actually a series of S-Curves as organizations mature, scale, and encounter new challenges. The best-performing teams don’t just optimize for the peak of the current curve—they anticipate and prepare for the next one.

The Hidden Cost of Late Adoption

The mistake many organizations make is waiting until their current technology stack is causing pain before considering alternatives. By then, the cost of migration is far higher because:

1. Band-Aid Engineering – Teams spend excessive time maintaining legacy systems, applying temporary fixes instead of focusing on strategic initiatives.
2. Opportunity Cost – The delay in upgrading means competitors leveraging newer tech are moving faster, hiring more efficiently, and delivering better user experiences.
3. Talent Drain – Engineers prefer working on cutting-edge, well-maintained stacks rather than struggling with technical debt. Holding onto outdated technology can push top talent away.

Forward-thinking leaders recognize that the right time to evaluate new technology is before they need its performance gains—not after they are struggling with bottlenecks.

Embracing Zero Environment Development (ZED) Before It's a Necessity 

Zero Environment Development (ZED) is a prime example of an emerging S-curve. Many organizations still invest heavily in managing local development environments, dealing with drift between dev and production, and struggling with onboarding delays. But these inefficiencies compound over time. 

Those who adopt ZED early position themselves at the start of a new S-curve — one that eliminates environment-related friction, accelerates development, and ultimately delivers a higher ROI long before competitors even recognize the need to make a shift.

The Leadership Imperative

VP Engineers and Heads of DevOps must not just manage current performance—they must anticipate future inefficiencies. The question isn’t whether your current stack is working today; it’s whether it will continue to be the best investment tomorrow.

By understanding and acting on the S-curve of technology adoption, leaders can prevent wasted effort, outpace competitors, and ensure their teams are working on the future—not stuck maintaining the past.

Where are you on the S-curve?