Platforms vs Best-of-Breed Solutions
WHY NOT BOTH?
Today’s cyber threats are more sophisticated and prevalent than ever, giving rise to a booming industry of security solutions and service providers tasked with staying a step ahead of threat actors. A dichotomy in strategic approach has been festering – the adoption of comprehensive cybersecurity “platforms” or the conglomeration of best-of-breed solutions. The former promises ease-of-use and long-term cost savings, while the latter offers the latest advances in technology and optimal protection -- resulting in a difficult trade-off for security leaders.
It’s a timely debate, with Palo Alto’s CEO recently taking to LinkedIn to rant / defend against the company’s go-to-market strategy involving platformization, saying he’s “confident that in the next five years, point solutions will be a thing of the past”. The post sparked plenty of debate surrounding the subject, with another security thought-leader suggesting “there is no such thing as a cybersecurity platform” and best-of-breed solutioning is optimal. These are polarizing takes from experienced, respected practitioners -- but the truth is somewhere in between.
Both strategies come with advantages and disadvantages, and choosing the best path requires a thorough understanding of an organization’s specific needs and priorities. Neither approach should be considered “wrong”, with the optimal solution being largely dependent on organizational size and maturity. As you’ll discover with our whitepaper, a third strategy has also emerged, primarily benefiting middle-market organizations, offering the best of both worlds.
