Operating Principle

2–4 min read

Build Versus Buy Is a Total Cost Question, Not a Feature Question

Build Versus Buy Is a Total Cost Question, Not a Feature Question

Build Versus Buy Is a Total Cost Question, Not a Feature Question

Building software in-house looks cheaper than buying it only if you ignore the ongoing cost of maintaining, securing, and upgrading it forever.

Building software in-house looks cheaper than buying it only if you ignore the ongoing cost of maintaining, securing, and upgrading it forever.

Building software in-house looks cheaper than buying it only if you ignore the ongoing cost of maintaining, securing, and upgrading it forever.

A build-versus-buy comparison that only weighs upfront build cost against subscription cost compares the wrong numbers. Building carries a permanent maintenance burden rarely priced into the initial decision.

A build-versus-buy comparison that only weighs upfront build cost against subscription cost compares the wrong numbers. Building carries a permanent maintenance burden rarely priced into the initial decision.

A build-versus-buy comparison that only weighs upfront build cost against subscription cost compares the wrong numbers. Building carries a permanent maintenance burden rarely priced into the initial decision.

A common comparison pits an ongoing vendor subscription against a one-time engineering project. It quietly leaves out the real second half of the build option: someone has to maintain it, patch its security holes, and upgrade it indefinitely.

That burden makes building look artificially cheap. A vendor's fee includes maintenance spread across customers. A firm building in-house is taking on that same cost alone, indefinitely.

Explore marketing analytics and attribution →

Operating Question

For your last major build-versus-buy decision, did the comparison include the ongoing cost of maintaining what you built, indefinitely?

For your last major build-versus-buy decision, did the comparison include the ongoing cost of maintaining what you built, indefinitely?

For your last major build-versus-buy decision, did the comparison include the ongoing cost of maintaining what you built, indefinitely?

Why It Matters

Firms that only compare upfront costs consistently underestimate the true cost of building in-house. Pricing the full lifetime cost against a vendor's ongoing fee produces a far more honest comparison.

Supporting Evidence

General software total-cost-of-ownership research

Research Notes

Building makes sense when software is a core differentiator worth owning. Vendor lock-in is a real buy-side cost and belongs in the comparison.

Practical Actions

Include indefinite maintenance cost in every build-versus-buy comparison.

Ask who owns patches and upgrades for as long as it is used.

Revisit old build decisions against current alternatives.

Continue Reading

Main Journal

All entries

Return to the complete Operator Journal library.

Main Journal

All entries

Return to the complete Operator Journal library.

Next Observation

Next article

Keep moving through the field notes.

Open the next observation

Next Observation

Next article

Keep moving through the field notes.

Open the next observation