No award for stacking tech: Why wrapping your EDI in an API isn’t innovation

Modernization should make things simpler. Smarter. More efficient. 

But in a rush to adopt the latest (and “greatest”) technology, companies often fall into a trap—adding new layers of tech not because it solves a real problem, but because it presents you as “forward-thinking”. 

One of the most common examples we see? Wrapping a solid EDI system in an API layer just to tick a trend box. 

APIs are great. Flexible. Familiar. So it’s easy to assume that adding an API on your EDI will speed things up or make it feel more modern. But that’s not what happens. 

What happens is:

• You introduce new points of failure
• You add costs without gaining control
• You make errors harder to isolate and fix
• You lose the predictability that EDI was built to provide

At Tech85, we’ve helped dozens of manufacturers and distributors untangle over-engineered setups that were doing more harm than good. The problem wasn’t their API. It was all the extra tech layered on top of it. 

Here’s why API-wrapping your EDI isn’t innovation—and what you should do if you actually want a modern, more resilient supply chain.

EDI already operates in real time—when done right

Some people believe a myth that EDI is slow. That it needs to be wrapped in APIs to keep up. 

Not true. 

Modern EDI systems—when properly configured—are fully automated and highly responsive: 

• Orders, ASNs, and invoices are processed in seconds
• Acknowledgments and inventory updates sync automatically
• Rule-based logic ensures data flows without delay or misinterpretation

In fact, EDI can be faster and more stable than API-based alternatives, particularly in high-volume B2B environments. It’s not a lack of speed—it’s a lack of visibility or poor implementation that creates bottlenecks. 

And this is one of the things we do at Tech85. We help businesses unlock near real-time performance from their EDI systems without having to add on an unnecessary API. 

Instead of modernizing, you’re adding overhead

On paper, layering an API onto your EDI sounds harmless. In practice, it introduces complexity without improving results. 

Here’s what you really end up doing: 

• Creating more translation layers 
• Adding more points where things can break
• Increasing the number of systems and vendors involved
• Obscuring the root cause of errors when they inevitably occur

We’ve seen clients waste valuable resources troubleshooting why data wasn’t syncing, only to discover their API layer failed silently while the EDI underneath was functioning perfectly. 

It’s not modernization. It’s multiplication—of tools, problems, and confusion. 

The trap of stacking for the sake of stacking (and the real cost of over-engineering)

Let’s call it what it is: a shiny object syndrome. Cosmetic tech upgrades that look modern but don’t actually move your business forward. 

APIs are great when they solve real integration challenges. But when they’re used as a mask—just to make your systems seem trendy—they become a liability. 

And the cost isn’t just technical. 

• More moving parts mean more places where things can fail
• More vendors mean more contracts and unnecessary integrations
• More abstraction means your team has less control over what’s happening

And—most importantly—it all means more time spent firefighting and less time scaling operations. 

The complexity you’ve added can also prevent your team from investing in what would’ve delivered actual improvements: better monitoring, error alerting, automated retries, and smart recovery protocols.  

That’s why we always say that real innovation should deliver clarity and efficiency. 

Streamline, don’t stack

The leading companies aren’t endlessly chasing trends. They are optimizing what already works. 

If your goal is to make order workflows faster, cleaner, and more resilient, here’s what we recommend (and what we help our clients implement every day): 

• Streamline your EDI—Get rid of middleware that adds friction without adding function
• Build bulletproof automation—Focus on building an error-free, logic-based workflow automation
• Prioritize operational clarity—Have your team know exactly where each document is, at any given point in time

These aren’t flashy moves. But they are the ones that actually move you forward. 

Real results don’t require over-engineering

Take Coast to Coast Fulfillment. Before working with Tech85, their systems were straining to handle growing demand—especially during peak season. 

After ditching the complexity and investing in lean, customized EDI automation, they were able to: 

• Scale seasonal order volume by 17x
• Reduce manual labor, even while adding more clients
• Maintain tailored processes without sacrificing performance or adding layers

That’s what you achieve when using just the right tools, implemented the right way. 

As their Managing Director, Vanessa Ghazarian put it:

“Going with an out-of-box EDI solution wouldn’t give us the flexibility we needed. When Tech85 came along, we could maintain the same flexibility at a larger scale.”

When should you use an API?

Let’s be clear: We’re not anti-API. They are incredibly valuable when it comes to:

• Connect non-EDI systems to your workflows
• Enable secure data sharing with cloud-based tools
• Feed dashboards, analytics, or internal apps with EDI-delivered data

But those use cases are precise and intentional. 

They are not about “modernizing” EDI. They are about solving real problems and removing real obstacles. 

Focus on what you actually need—cold, hard results.

And you won’t get them from overcomplicating things. 

If your EDI is automated, integrated, and doing its job, you don’t need to cover it up with layers of abstraction. You need to strengthen it and scale it. Not reinvent it. 

At Tech85, we help supply chain teams get leaner, not trendier. We eliminate the tech clutter, restore clarity, and build systems that scale quietly and reliably behind the scenes. 

‍Book a call with our leading experts to see how we can simplify your order workflows—saving you from the seductive overstacking trap.