How to Consolidate Your EdTech Stack Without Killing Innovation (or Faculty Trust)
Shrinking budgets, rising compliance obligations, and new expectations around AI governance are pushing institutions to take a hard look at their technology portfolios. With upcoming accessibility deadlines and increased scrutiny of overlapping licenses, many are being asked to “streamline” the edtech ecosystem.
But consolidation isn’t just a financial or compliance decision, it’s a cultural one. Faculty trust and student experience hang in the balance. The goal isn’t simply fewer tools; it’s fewer, better tools that everyone uses well. Below is a step-by-step framework for simplifying your stack strategically, without eroding innovation or engagement.
And before we dive in, you might ask “Why is the owner of an ed tech company sharing this message with me?”. Fair question.
We have many schools in this position and they’re all running some variation of the process I describe below. I’ve been in the unique position of learning from all of them so I am sharing with you.
For us, it’s been positive as the result has been turning to Harmonize to solve some of the consolidation issues since we cover so many different pedagogical approaches that are often covered by 3-5 different tech vendors and they’re able to pull funding for both RSI and Title II compliance to help.
Regardless of if you’re in a position to adopt Harmonize though, the below information should be valid and hopefully helpful.
1. Why Tool Sprawl Happens and Why Faculty Buy-In Matters
Tool sprawl didn’t appear overnight. During the pandemic, instructors rapidly adopted tools that helped them stay connected with students. Over time, decentralized budgets, department-specific preferences, and easy-to-install integrations compounded the problem.
The hidden costs are everywhere: redundant licenses, uneven support, accessibility and data-privacy risks, and inconsistent student experiences. Each new login and workflow adds friction, especially when students have to learn different tools for every class.
For faculty, though, many of those tools represent pedagogical identity and creative autonomy. Taking one away can feel like stripping away a part of their teaching craft. That’s why faculty input and partnership must be central to any consolidation effort. Removing a beloved tool without consultation breeds long-term resistance, especially when adoption of future technologies depends on goodwill and trust.
2. Principles for a Successful Consolidation
Before decisions are made, define success through three intersecting goals:
- Pedagogical integrity – Every retained or new tool should demonstrably enhance learning, engagement, or Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI).
- Operational coherence – Tools should integrate smoothly, scale efficiently, and meet accessibility and compliance standards, especially with the upcoming Title II requirement changes requiring so much more effort from faculty and staff.
- Faculty partnership – Processes must feel transparent, inclusive, and supported, not imposed.
These principles allow you to shift the narrative from cost-cutting to clarity and alignment. They also open the door to consider selecting unified platforms that can consolidate multiple existing functions under one familiar interface, minimizing learning-curve fatigue for both students and instructors.
3. The Seven-Step Framework for Smart, Faculty-Centered Consolidation
- Set clear criteria and guiding principles.
Establish what “essential” means for your institution, learning impact, adoption breadth, accessibility readiness, integration ease, and cost efficiency. Shared criteria make every decision defensible.
- Inventory and categorize tools.
Collect data from LMS integrations, procurement records, and departmental lists. Group each as core, enhancement, or niche. This step often reveals overlapping tools serving similar pedagogical purposes, a signal that consolidation or a unified replacement could reduce redundancy and training load.
- Gather faculty voice and usage data together.
Pair analytics (usage rates, course counts, time-in-tool) with faculty surveys on satisfaction and learning impact. Include focus groups to capture the “why” behind preferences, especially for tools that inspire strong loyalty. Each tool often has a few die-hard champions that understand it in depth. Talk to them and include them.
- Gather student data.
Students experience the downside of tool sprawl most directly. Collect feedback on which platforms create friction or accessibility challenges. Often, a single comprehensive platform can resolve many of these issues by providing a consistent environment across courses.
- Map redundancies and identify strengths.
Plot adoption and satisfaction against function. Identify where several tools overlap and create a list of pros and cons for each tool. Be sure to understand the AI roadmap and philosophy of the tools in question as you don’t want to be tied to a tool that either has blinders on where AI integration is concerned and/or that is pushing too fast into AI without a firm ethical base.
- Run a shared governance review.
Form a faculty-inclusive EdTech Review Committee to evaluate data and apply rubrics. This transparent process ensures decisions feel collaborative rather than top-down, while building shared ownership of the outcome.
- Plan for transition and support.
Communicate decisions early, provide training sessions, migration guides, and peer mentors, and consider sandbox periods where old and new systems overlap. When moving to a unified platform, highlight how it consolidates multiple workflows, reducing logins, learning curves, and grading complexity.
- Communicate the “why.”
Frame changes around benefits: consistency, accessibility, easier support, and stronger compliance, not just cost. When faculty see that consolidation simplifies their daily teaching, not just the budget line, they’re far more likely to adopt.
4. Safeguarding Faculty Trust
Faculty trust is the cornerstone of sustainable innovation. Show respect for the time, effort, and creativity they’ve invested in their classes. Share data transparently, pilot transitions with volunteer instructors, and showcase success stories from early adopters.
The most effective transitions happen when faculty recognize that new tools are reducing complexity, not adding to it, especially when multiple legacy tools can be replaced by a single, more intuitive solution. The message should be clear: this isn’t about taking something away, it’s about giving you more time to teach.
I can’t stress this enough, faculty have to be engaged, heard and respected throughout this process of both identifying tools that could be removed as well as adopting any replacement tools. If not, the damage will be way more expensive than the cost of the tools.
5. Beyond Budget Cuts: The Strategic Payoff
A well-planned consolidation yields far more than financial efficiency. It creates a coherent, future-ready digital ecosystem that:
- Streamlines training and support through the CTL.
- Ensures a consistent, accessible student experience.
- Provides cleaner analytics for learning improvement.
- Frees resources for innovation and AI-ready teaching tools.
- Builds a culture of collaboration over compliance.
The result is a leaner, smarter ecosystem, one where faculty, students, and support teams operate in sync instead of navigating a patchwork of disconnected apps.
