Last year a hospital called me in to troubleshoot a Wi-Fi problem their own IT team could not crack. Before I even reached the front desk, I already had a working theory. Standing at the main entrance, I counted seven access points within clear view. In fact, that number told me most of what I needed to know. Overall, this is a story about a mistake I see across enterprise Wi-Fi.
Seven Access Points Before I Said a Word
The staff expected me to open a laptop and run diagnostics for an hour. Instead, I asked one simple question. When did the network get worse, and what changed right before that? Predictably, someone had added access points to patch a few dead spots. In fact, that well-meaning decision was the problem, not the cure. Over the years I have watched this same pattern play out in warehouses, schools, and government buildings.
Here is the part that stings. The hospital had already approved a purchase order for twelve more access points. As a result, they were about to pay to make the problem worse. That is why I stopped the diagnostics and walked the floor first. Ultimately, the most valuable thing a wireless engineer does is prevent a bad purchase.
Why Too Many Access Points Hurt Performance
Enterprise Wi-Fi does not behave like ceiling lighting. More access points do not automatically mean better coverage. Instead, every radio on the same channel competes for the same airtime. Consequently, client devices hear several strong signals and struggle to pick one. As a result, a laptop clings to a distant access point or bounces between neighbors. Meanwhile, throughput drops and voice calls stutter, even when the signal meter shows full bars.
This effect has a name. We call it co-channel interference. In the 2.4 GHz band it is especially brutal, because only three channels do not overlap. Additionally, tightly packed radios raise the noise floor for every device nearby. The 5 GHz band offers more room, yet high transmit power erases that advantage fast. Therefore, the network can get slower as you add hardware, which feels backwards to most IT teams. For enterprise networks, density without a plan is a liability.
What the Survey Actually Showed
I ran a passive survey with Ekahau across the affected floors. The heatmap confirmed my walk-in read within twenty minutes. Signal strength was excellent almost everywhere. However, the signal-to-noise ratio was poor in the busiest corridors. Specifically, access points sat too close together and ran at maximum transmit power. For this reason, their cells overlapped heavily and drowned each other out. Nurses near the overlap zones felt it first, because their handsets roamed constantly.
The fix did not require a single new access point. Rather, we lowered transmit power on a group of radios. Then we disabled a handful of access points that added nothing but noise. Next, we set a clean, non-overlapping channel plan across both bands. Finally, we raised the minimum data rate to encourage smarter roaming. Within a day, roaming smoothed out and the complaints stopped.
The Lesson for Canadian IT Teams
Adding too many access points feels like visible progress. Often, though, it makes the experience worse. Before you approve more hardware, ask whether anyone has actually measured airtime and the noise floor. Notably, a proper RF survey answers that question in hours, not weeks. Similarly, insist on seeing signal-to-noise numbers, not just signal strength on a map. Moreover, it usually saves money, because the fix is tuning rather than buying. Ultimately, the goal is a designed network, not a crowded one.
At Baiden Group we run into networks with too many access points constantly, especially in hospitals, warehouses, and schools. Importantly, our RF site surveys find the real cause before anyone spends on more gear. Whether you need a fresh Wi-Fi design, a troubleshooting visit, or ongoing managed Wi-Fi, we always start with measurement. Have questions about how these developments affect your network? Reach out to the Baiden Group team.