The Case For and Against: “The Death of Generalized Tools”

The Case For: Generalized tools are relics of a one-size-fits-all era. Their inefficiencies—whether due to bloated features or lack of user empathy—alienate businesses. Hyper-specific solutions win by deeply embedding themselves in niche workflows, unlocking not just loyalty but also pricing power. Take modular ERP systems like Toolkit as an example: they empower SMBs to redefine their processes from scratch, something SAP could never achieve.

The Case Against: Generalized tools survive for a reason: scale and interconnectedness. While niches are attractive, fragmentation introduces complexity. Businesses relying on dozens of niche solutions face “integration fatigue,” creating bottlenecks and inefficiencies that negate their initial benefits. Moreover, niches rarely provide the scale needed for venture-backed returns, leaving them vulnerable to consolidation by larger players.

What I Believe: The tension between generalists and niches isn’t a zero-sum game. The winners will be those who embrace “modular consolidation”—tools that feel hyper-specific but integrate seamlessly into larger ecosystems. These businesses will dominate by offering the adaptability of niche solutions with the scale of generalized systems.