Not because developers lack skill.
Not because teams don’t care.

But because APIs are often designed like code artifacts — not like products meant to be consumed.

After working closely with integration platforms, APIs, and enterprise systems, I’ve seen the same patterns repeat across organizations—regardless of size or industry.

In this post, I’ll break down the top 5 API design mistakes I consistently see in enterprises, along with practical ways to avoid them.

#1 Designing APIs Around Databases Instead of Users

This is the most common—and most subtle—mistake.

Many APIs are simply thin wrappers over database tables:

/getCustomerById
/getOrderById
/getInvoiceDetails

At first glance, this seems logical. But it reveals a deeper issue. These APIs expose how your system is structured, not what the consumer actually needs.

Why this is a problem

• Forces clients to make multiple calls

• Leaks internal data structure

• Makes APIs harder to evolve

What to do instead

Design APIs around use cases, not entities.

Instead of:

GET /order/{id}

Think:

GET /customer/{id}/recent-orders

This aligns the API to a real user need, not a storage model. API consumers can understand the intent of the API.

Key Insight

APIs are not database access layers.
They are consumer experience layers.

#2 Over fetching and Under fetching Data

This one silently kills performance and developer happiness. You’ve probably seen both extremes in various situations like below,

An API returns 50 fields when you only need 5. (Over fetching)

You make 5 API calls just to render one UI screen. (Under fetching)

Why it matters

• Increased latency

• Higher network cost

• Poor developer experience

• Difficult frontend logic

What to do instead

Design APIs around specific consumption patterns.

✅ Principles:

• Define responses based on real usage

• Avoid “one-size-fits-all” APIs

👉 Advanced pattern:

• Backend for Frontend (BFF)
  Tailor APIs per client (mobile, web, etc.)

Key Insight

A good API minimizes effort—for both machines and humans.

#3 Ignoring Versioning Strategy

This is a mistake that doesn’t hurt today—but will hurt a lot later.

Everything works fine… until:

• You need to change response structure

• You want to rename fields

• You remove something “unused”

• You need to accommodate underlying schema or data structure

And suddenly, all your API consumers and apps break.

Why this happens

APIs are treated as internal assets, not long-lived contracts.

What to do instead

Always assume:

“This API will evolve—and consumers will depend on it.”

✅ Common strategies:

• URI versioning → /v1/orders

• Header-based versioning → Pass the version in the HTTP Headers

Key Insight

Breaking an API is not a code change.
It’s a production incident for someone else.

#4 Tight Coupling Between Systems

This is where API design starts affecting system stability at scale.

In many enterprises:

• System A calls System B directly

• Response formats are tightly bound

• Timing and availability are assumed

The problem

👉 A small change in one system causes:

• Cascading failures

• Hard-to-debug issues

• Reduced scalability

• Hard to make changes in any of the systems

What to do instead

Introduce decoupling patterns:

✅ Options:

• Event-driven architecture (async communication)

• Messaging systems

• API abstraction layers

• Integration platforms (iPaaS)

Key Insight

Good API design reduces dependency.
Bad API design creates fragility.

#5 Not Treating APIs as Products

This is the root cause behind most of the other mistakes.

In many teams:

• APIs are built as tasks

• Documentation is an afterthought

• Naming is inconsistent

• No feedback loop exists

The reality

APIs are not just technical assets.

👉 They are products used by developers. They use API documentation to build apps.

What changes when you treat APIs as products?

You start asking:

• Who is the consumer?

• What problem does this solve?

• How easy is it to use?

• Is adoption improving?

What to do instead

Adopt a product mindset:

✅ Focus on:

• Clear documentation

• Intuitive naming

• Version lifecycle

• Developer experience

Key Insight

Great APIs are not just functional.
They are adoptable, usable, and loved.

🔁 Quick Recap

Here are the 5 mistakes:

1. Designing APIs around databases

2. Over fetching / under fetching data

3. No versioning strategy

4. Tight coupling between systems

5. Not treating APIs as products

🚀 Final Thoughts

If you fix even 2 of these mistakes, your APIs will already be:

✅ More scalable
✅ Easier to use
✅ More resilient
✅ Better aligned with real-world needs

But more importantly—

You’ll shift from “building APIs” to designing systems that people can rely on.

At first glance, it sounds unlikely. However, in today’s digital world, public perception can shift almost instantly—and companies that fail to meet expectations are especially vulnerable.

OLA EV is a compelling example of this dynamic. Once seen as a disruptor in India’s electric vehicle market, the company experienced rapid success followed by a steep decline. This article explores OLA EV’s journey, with a focus on how product quality issues ultimately eroded trust and investor confidence.

OLA’s Vision and Market Debut

In 2024, OLA made a high-profile entry into the Indian stock market with its IPO, listing at approximately INR 78 per share. The launch generated significant excitement among investors and industry observers.

Like many others, I participated in the IPO, encouraged by the strong market sentiment and the company’s ambitious vision to lead India’s EV revolution.

The Rapid Rise

In its early days as a public company, OLA EV appeared unstoppable. Within just a week of listing, the stock price doubled—reinforcing investor confidence and market optimism.

The prevailing belief was that OLA would redefine the Indian EV market. Buoyed by this momentum, I increased my investment, confident in the company’s future.

This period felt like a “honeymoon phase,” where growth seemed inevitable and risks were largely overlooked.

The Turning Point: Product Concerns Go Public

The narrative began to shift when a viral tweet by a well-known public figure highlighted issue with OLA EV’s products. While the tweet itself was brief, its impact was immediate and far-reaching.

Soon after, OLA’s stock price began to decline.

What initially seemed like a temporary reaction turned into a sustained downward trend. This prompted a deeper look into the company’s fundamentals.

Underlying Issues: Product Quality and Customer Experience

As concerns surfaced, it became clear that the issue was not the tweet itself—but what it exposed.

Customers had been experiencing ongoing problems, including:

• Inconsistent product quality

• Poor service center responsiveness

• Charging-related issues

• Safety concerns, including reports of vehicle fires

These issues indicated a gap between OLA’s market promise and its product reality. More importantly, the company struggled to respond effectively to customer feedback.

The Fall

Within a year, OLA EV’s stock price dropped significantly—from its peak to approximately INR 22.62 by March 2026.

Despite early promise, the company has not yet seen a meaningful recovery.

The decline reflects not just market sentiment, but a broader loss of customer trust.

The Bigger Lesson

OLA EV’s story highlights a critical business truth:

You can create excitement, generate buzz, and achieve rapid growth—but long-term success depends on delivering consistent value.

At the core of this value is product quality.

When basic customer expectations are not met, even a small trigger—like a viral tweet—can accelerate a company’s decline by exposing deeper issues.

Key Takeaways for Product Managers and Founders

• Product quality is non-negotiable
  It is the foundation of trust and long-term success.

• Customer feedback must be taken seriously
  Ignoring early signals can amplify future problems.

• Growth cannot outpace product maturity
  Scaling a flawed product only magnifies its weaknesses.

• Reputation is fragile in the digital era
  Public perception can shift quickly and dramatically.

Conclusion

OLA EV’s journey serves as a valuable lesson for anyone building or managing products.

Speed, marketing, and hype can help you enter the market—but they cannot sustain you. Without a strong product foundation, long-term success is unlikely.

This experience also reinforced a personal lesson for me as an investor: overlooking fundamentals can lead to significant—and sometimes unrecoverable—losses.