What would disprove this analysis? (Criterion 1)

Teams with comprehensive CI/CD pipelines maintain execution times under 15 minutes over 3+ years

What would disprove this analysis? (Criterion 2)

Adding more pipeline steps consistently improves bug detection rates without diminishing returns

What would disprove this analysis? (Criterion 3)

Developers never bypass CI/CD pipelines regardless of execution time

When should you avoid ci/cd pipeline sprawl?

Your pipeline takes more than 15 minutes for the common case. Your team regularly retries pipelines due to flaky tests

What are alternatives?

Tiered pipeline: Fast checks on commit, thorough checks on merge to main. Affected-only testing: Run only tests affected by changed files. Local pre-commit hooks: Catch common issues before they hit CI

Catalog

T012

Technology

CI/CD Pipeline Sprawl

MEDIUM(75%)

February 2026

4 sources

Context

Teams automate everything in the CI/CD pipeline — linting, testing, security scanning, dependency checks, container builds, deployments, notifications. Each addition seems reasonable. But pipelines accumulate steps over years without pruning. A pipeline that took 5 minutes in year one takes 45 minutes in year three. Flaky tests that fail 2% of the time become blockers when you have 500 tests. Security scanners produce hundreds of findings that nobody triages. The pipeline becomes the bottleneck it was designed to eliminate. Developers start working around it — pushing directly to main, skipping checks, batching changes to avoid waiting. The automation that was supposed to increase confidence becomes a tax on velocity that teams actively circumvent.

Hypothesis

What people believe

“Automating everything in the pipeline improves quality and speed.”

Actual Chain

→

Pipeline execution time grows unbounded(5 min → 45 min over 3 years)

└

Developers context-switch while waiting for pipeline

└

Batch changes to reduce pipeline runs

└

Feedback loop from commit to result too slow

→

Flaky tests become systemic blockers(2% flake rate × 500 tests = frequent false failures)

└

Developers retry pipelines 2-3 times per PR

└

Real failures hidden among flaky noise

└

Trust in test suite erodes

→

Security scanner alert fatigue(Hundreds of findings, most low-priority)

└

Critical findings buried in noise

└

Teams suppress or ignore scanner output

→

Pipeline itself becomes unmaintainable(YAML/config files grow to thousands of lines)

└

Nobody understands the full pipeline

└

Pipeline changes are high-risk and rarely attempted

Impact

Metric	Before	After	Delta
Pipeline execution time	5 min	45 min	+800%
Developer wait time per day	10 min	90 min	+800%
Pipeline bypass rate	0%	15-25% of changes	+20%
Bugs caught by pipeline	Increasing	Plateaus as trust erodes	Diminishing returns

Navigation

Don't If

•Your pipeline takes more than 15 minutes for the common case
•Your team regularly retries pipelines due to flaky tests

If You Must

1.Set a hard time budget for pipeline execution and enforce it
2.Quarantine flaky tests immediately — fix or delete within a week
3.Run expensive checks (security scans, E2E tests) on merge, not on every commit
4.Review and prune pipeline steps quarterly

Alternatives

Tiered pipeline — Fast checks on commit, thorough checks on merge to main
Affected-only testing — Run only tests affected by changed files
Local pre-commit hooks — Catch common issues before they hit CI

Falsifiability

This analysis is wrong if:

Teams with comprehensive CI/CD pipelines maintain execution times under 15 minutes over 3+ years
Adding more pipeline steps consistently improves bug detection rates without diminishing returns
Developers never bypass CI/CD pipelines regardless of execution time

Sources

1.
CircleCI State of Software Delivery Report
Data showing average CI pipeline times increased 3x over 3 years across their platform
2.
Google Engineering: Flaky Tests at Scale
Google's internal data on flaky test impact — 16% of their tests exhibit flakiness
3.
Thoughtworks Technology Radar: Pipeline as Code
Recommendations for managing pipeline complexity as automation grows
4.
DORA State of DevOps Report
Research showing pipeline speed directly correlates with deployment frequency and team performance

T011 T006 T020