Why IT-SecOps Convergence is Non-Negotiable

One of the most underrated challenges enterprises face today isn’t a new strain of ransomware or a supply-chain exploit, but an internal disconnect. There is a widening gap between the teams responsible for “keeping systems running (IT Operations)” and the teams responsible for “keeping them safe (Security Operations).”

The message is clear: siloed operations are no longer just inefficient—they’re a security liability.

As someone who’s been working for more than a decade towards intersecting IT and security, I can say with certainty: in 2026, the organizations that win will be the ones that break the wall between IT and Security and operate as one unified engine.

Why IT and Security Teams Are Failing Each Other?

The first, and often the most difficult step toward achieving true IT-SecOps convergence, is cultural. For years, IT and security teams have operated in silos, essentially functioning as two different businesses. While the security world measures resilience through metrics like Mean Time to Identify (MTTI) and Mean Time to Contain (MTTC), IT teams have long operated with Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) and Mean Time to Respond (MTTR). On paper, these Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) appear aligned—both measure speed and efficiency. But in practice, they reflect different views: one is laser-focused on minimizing risk, the other on maximizing uptime. When these metrics drive independent behavior, alignment becomes optional instead of expected.

This divide wasn’t accidental. Historically, bringing security deeper into IT workflows was seen as a roadblock—more approvals, more checks, more delays. Add in legacy organizational structures, different tools, and the absence of a shared communication layer, and both teams naturally optimized for their own success rather than a shared outcome. Consequently, one team frequently sees the other as a bottleneck. The relationship defaults to reacting instead of planning, and neither team gets what it truly needs.

The real opportunity lies in establishing a shared mandate. Both teams need to understand that their goals are two sides of the same coin: you can’t have productive systems that aren’t secure, and security that breaks the system isn’t sustainable; therefore, convergence begins not with tools, but with alignment of intent. Once this clicks, both teams begin working from a common set of goals, shared KPIs, and joint decision frameworks.

That transformation removes the classic “hand-off gap” where issues fall between departments—whether it’s a vulnerability that security flags but IT deprioritizes, or an urgent patch IT deploys that security wasn’t looped into. True convergence replaces this broken relay model with shared accountability, where success is defined by systems that are both efficient and safe.

What used to be a tug-of-war between “security slows us down” vs. “IT exposes us to risk” now evolves into a third, healthier option: joint ownership, backed by unified data, consistent policies, and connected workflows.

Why Unified Visibility is Your Fastest Route to Lower Risk?

The recent Coinbase breach is a definitive example of where IT and SecOps convergence failed. The attack, which relied on bribing insiders and contractors, exposed a fundamental flaw: the IT team, focusing on operational efficiency, granted access that was overly broad and exceeded “least-privilege” standards during provisioning. This created a gap that the SecOps team, tasked with monitoring policy compliance, could not effectively contain. This breakdown highlights the urgent need for unified visibility and real-time controls to bridge the disconnect between IT and Security.

When organizations transition from siloed tools to unified visibility, three things happen measurably:

The first shift is the collapse of tool sprawl and the emergence of a single source of truth. Most enterprises still manage devices using different tools across their lifecycle—one for inventory, another for patching, another for antivirus, and several more for security response and compliance. Each tool carries its own data, dashboard, and learning curve. With a unified platform, these processes consolidate into fewer integrated workflows. Teams finally operate on shared data, policies are defined once and applied everywhere, and the time and cost of training, licensing, and manual reconciliation simply disappear.

The second outcome is a dramatic reduction in MTTR, largely because “waiting time” is removed from the process. In disconnected environments, a single malware alert can trigger hours of back-and-forth: Security raises the ticket, IT validates the data, isolation is delayed, patches are queued, and the threat lives longer than it should. With shared real-time telemetry, both teams diagnose and act from the same place, eliminating hand-offs and approval delays. Response becomes immediate, containment becomes faster, and organizational risk shrinks.

The third transformation is the shift from manual ticket-driven operations to automated workflows. Instead of humans routing tasks, the system identifies a vulnerable or non-compliant device, applies the required patch or configuration change, and validates the result—without human involvement. AI-led remediation and policy orchestration free teams from repetitive, low-impact tasks and allow them to focus on strategic work—threat hunting, optimization, and innovation.

HexCon25 Takeaway: The “Do More with Less” Mandate

The strongest security posture doesn’t come from piling on more tools. It comes from creating continuous alignment between management, security, and user experience. When those three functions operate in sync, IT doesn’t deploy technology that security can’t enforce, security doesn’t introduce controls that slow down work, and users don’t feel the need to bypass policies with shadow apps or risky shortcuts.

That philosophy resonated strongly at our annual user conference, HexCon25, where one theme stood out: enterprises are striving to do more with less. According to Forrester’s Digital Workplace and Employee Technology Survey 2025, 61% of organizations plan to increase their investments in endpoint management this year, with the convergence of ITOps and SecOps emerging as a key strategic focus. While organizations can still choose standalone tools—from remote monitoring to patch management to Mobile Device Management (MDM)— the clear preference is now gravitating toward unified endpoint management (UEM) solutions that consolidate these capabilities into a single framework. The advantage isn’t just in cost reduction, but in consistency, visibility, and simplicity.

When a unified structure is implemented, policies can be deployed instantly, validated automatically, and adjusted based on real user impact—all without waiting for separate teams to sync.

The advantage in 2026 won’t belong to the companies with the highest security spend. It will belong to the companies that eliminate silos, unify data, automate responses, and treat endpoint security as a shared business priority instead of a departmental task list. Threats are converging, devices are converging, and workflows are converging. The organizations that respond by converging their own internal systems will move faster and defend smarter.