EXPERT FORECAST : BANKING AND FINANCE
also allow the modern style of rapid development that helps meet market needs in time to reap the rewards . Building its own solutions also allows the organisation to build its IP portfolio , giving it an edge in the market .
The caveats , then ? There needs to be a rich in-house talent pool including IT leaders and analysts who can scope large projects and price them accurately before a single line of code is written . Remember , one of the attractions of COTS solutions is the predictability of their costing models compared with the all-too-common tendency of self-builds ’ costs to spiral out of control . It is always possible to bring in third-party expertise to plug these talent gaps . Failing this , the organisation ’ s HR team will need to go on a fastidious recruitment drive before any planning can occur . Low-code platforms and citizen developers may seem like fine options but without the proper governance , this is a highway to nowhere .
Each to their own
Of course , I could write a whole separate article on the implications for cybersecurity of having a third-party in the technology mix . And that is before we have even begun to discuss the impact of multiple vendors and FinTechs – which may be necessary to bring the organisation ’ s digital vision to life . The bank would need to employ someone fulltime to liaise with these business partners , negotiate and oversee SLAs and police the fine line between these activities and regulatory compliance .
Building : A dream for the control-conscious , but where ’ s the talent ?
What CIO doesn ’ t relish the prospect of complete control over the IT stack ? Building their own systems gives them that . Development and integration are theirs to command and use cases can fully govern implementation , rather than the twist and bend that IT has to go through to accommodate even a 90 % requirementsfit with a COTS purchase . Stakeholders can join the dots from aspiration to value for each business unit . CIOs and their teams know the business inside and out and can pivot from the needs of customers and customer-facing employees to cybersecurity and risk management and consider one while developing solutions for another – something COTS vendors cannot do to the same extent .
And then , there is deployment . It tends to be less invasive and more straightforward when its planners are those that oversee the same production environment every day . DevOps and the CI / CD pipeline
In the end , the programme ’ s needs will help to make the build-or-buy decision . Building , despite the control it offers , may still not be right for standard use cases such as CRM and HR , which can be appropriately served by an off-theshelf solution . On the other hand , if the organisation has a differentiating vision , then almost by definition , COTS tools will fall short . The decision-maker must be as fluid as the decision and consider the benefits and drawbacks of each approach in the context of the specific use case they are looking to implement . � www . intelligentfin . tech
65