Dilemma

[Chico]

I need some help from the our assembled bunch of IT professionals.What are the pro /cons of going for an inhouse developed IT solution compared with an off the shelf package? At the moment its all conceptual high level stuff so interested in general advice and any experiences in support of any particular option.

[ancient]

I need some help from the our assembled bunch of IT professionals.What are the pro /cons of going for an inhouse developed IT solution compared with an off the shelf package? At the moment its all conceptual high level stuff so interested in general advice and any experiences in support of any particular option.

a) They do say that if you go for COTS (commercial off the shelf package) then be prepared to change the business to fit the package rather than the other way round.

b) If the COTS requires more than 20% changes to fit the business you might be better off doing bespoke.

c) Time to market, and is the solution tactical or strategic

d) Work out the trade-offs between bespoke and COTS, consider time, cost and risk

e) Understand the hidden costs with COTS e.g. most suppliers work on 50% product cost and 50% consultancy on top.

f) Products like SAP have a high ticket consultancy rate that needs to be added on top.

g) Look at the Total Cost of Ownership between the options over a number of years.

h) Consider what your competitors are doing within that line of business.

i) If you go for COTS then try and get the business to understand the compromises needed (to fit with the product) as well as the potential benefits e.g. potential reduced delivery risk.

j) Do a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunites and Threats) analysis on the options.

k) Get the business to make the final decision and get them to own the outcome.

l) Decide (in terms of the COTS) what you can adopt (out of the box), what you need to adapt (change) and what is missing? e.g. what else do I need to buy.

m) Do not forget about integration

n) Think about data model compatability, conversion, migration etc.

o) Define an enterprise architecture so you understand the as-is the to-be and the associated transition steps.

p) And finally don't forget the COTS salesman and his bottle of snake oil!

[Alf W]

Unless it's a very standard 'Off the Shelf' type of implementation, this approach usually results in lazy initial analysis followed by expensive failure. The supplier has you completely by the balls and the client has totally unrealistic expectations of what they are going to get and when.

Mind you, who develops anything significant "In-house" these days?

[Chico]

Mind you, who develops anything significant "In-house" these days?

Well you will be surprised. Current client is looking to spend tens of millions on various "in-house solutions". Oh dear was my first thought. Surely there are loads "off the shelf products" that could do the job much better? We shall see.

Ancient - thanks for the info.

[OwlHoot]

Well you will be surprised. Current client is looking to spend tens of millions on various "in-house solutions". Oh dear was my first thought. Surely there are loads "off the shelf products" that could do the job much better?

I can't believe I'm hearing this - Do you want to put contractors out of work?

Of course they should go for an in-house solutions! ("Off the shelf products" indeed! )

[Chico]

I can't believe I'm hearing this - Do you want to put contractors out of work?

Of course they should go for an in-house solutions! ("Off the shelf products" indeed! )

What about efficiency? Doing the right thing etc etc....? I have yet to be convinced that all the in house developers are needed.

[BlasterBates]

If the client has big pockets, go for in-house.

With COTS the client will be dissatisfied. With in-house, get the right people and perhaps with the odd easy to integrate package you might have a satisfied client.

The main thing is that you relieve him of his excess cash.

[milanbenes]

this is an excellent question,

hmmm, from a contractor perspective....

own developed applications are the best because:

normally everything gets f*cked up and time scales slip leading to a good long contract


from a business perspective:

off the shelf products are the best for any business

because... they work off the shelf !!


it seems to me that it is the stoopidity of middle managers
who go on some ego trip saying we need this customized
we need that changed to fit our business - their business what
the feck do those middle managers know about business ?

anyway, I don't complain, because customization means money
for us contractors

however, in my plan b company, software will only be used which
can be implemented off the shelf

if we have to change our business processes then so be it and who can
say that our business processes were the best anyway ?

Milan.

[Lucifer Box]

As I'm sure you're more than familiar with, Chico, most businesses believe their business model is unique, no one else operates in the way they do, and everybody else has got it wrong. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred they are deluding themselves and their business modus operandi is identical to dozens of other companies.

Unless they are genuinely and truly remarkable, or operating in a highly niche field (like my clients), there is not usually a burning need to bespoke a solution from scratch. The usual objections to packaged solutions are that "we will lose our [usually imagined] competitive edge". You need to be able to counter that argument if you are going package.

[milanbenes]

but on the other hand if you want a long assignment tell them their business is special and to maintain their competitive advantage they must implement a bespoke in house developed solution

Milan.