Solution Types

By understanding the differences between options for solution delivery, managers may equip themselves for better choices and risk assessment.

I have attempted maximum objectivity, restraining biases.
While many facets of solutions exist and are important, for the sake of equipping users on solely comparing options for delivery, I’ll discuss those aspects in separate articles.
Categories below sometimes overlap, but so I may compare them, for this article I’ll ignore those cases. For example, some COTS software is designed to be extensible, thereby also being “hybrid.”

Custom Development: This category involves software written “from scratch,” where no part of yet previously existed, is developed, implemented, and supported by staff within the organization.
- Example: ASP.NET MVC/Core website with SQL Server database data store.
Commercial Off-the-Shelf Software (COTS): This software is purchased from the vendor in a “completed” state.
Hybrid: This software is considered a blend of the former two types where most of the software is completed by a vendor, but they’ve “extended” possibilities to the end user for changes, such as adding input fields, changing reports, etc. This capability is described as “extensible.”
- Examples: Kentico CMS, SAP ERP/Business Objects, Cognos, Microsoft Dynamics.

The following factors were considered in the comparison.

Costs in terms of:
- Time for: initial delivery, requirements gathering, initial milestones, ongoing change, support, infrastructure maintenance, personnel and specialized skillset, procurement processes, etc.
- Budgetary constraints.
Flexibility with respect to requirements and ongoing change.
Longevity with respect to long term satisfaction.

Category	Pros	Cons
Custom Development	Greatest opportunity of satisfying requirements (behavior/workflow, “look and feel,” input and reports, integration with other systems). Least risk of lengthy procurement process required for COTS or hybrid solutions.	Highest costs initially (requirements gathering). Highest risk: ongoing change (each change can break any feature). No default feature or data access to end user. No default feature reuse between systems. Highest internal support costs/degrade resource availability on other support/projects. Highest costs in personnel – developers, and stakeholder involvement decreases their productivity.
COTS	Fastest initial delivery time. Least personnel costs/skills needed.	Least control over the site (see Pro above for Custom Development). Highest risk of feature/business need misalignment, causing potential extra work on users. Highest risk of decreased ROI due to poor requirements analysis. Least flexible to changing needs (grants). Potential lengthy procurement process.
Hybrid	Least costs in terms of change. Least risk of change management. Second most flexible to changing needs (grants) after custom software.	Highest purchase and annual costs. Potential lengthy procurement process. Requires the second most expensive skillset to incorporate changes.

Comparison of Solution Categories