Configure
Use an existing product when its core model fits and the organisation can live with its boundaries.
Evidence gate: a representative workflow completes without hidden manual work, unsafe permissions or unacceptable data/export restrictions.
Options paper / 01
Custom software is one option, not the default answer.
Choose the smallest intervention that resolves the operational problem without creating more dependency than the organisation can own.
Connect
Integrate systems when the main cost is re-keying, invisible hand-offs, duplicate records or status chasing.
Evidence gate: source-of-truth rules, identifiers, retries, reconciliation and a visible error queue are agreed.
Automate
Automate a stable, repetitive route while preserving human judgement and exception handling.
Evidence gate: the trigger, owner, completion state, exceptions, audit history and manual recovery route are explicit.
Commission bespoke
Build when the organisation has a valuable workflow that available products cannot support responsibly.
Evidence gate: the first release has a bounded outcome, accountable owner, acceptance cases and maintainable source.
Modernise
Replace or restructure an ageing system in stages when support, security, integration or maintainability risk is material.
Evidence gate: business rules, data, reports, integrations and operational knowledge are inventoried before retirement begins.
Defer with controls
Keep the system when replacement risk exceeds current exposure and practical controls can contain the problem.
Evidence gate: the risk owner, monitoring, backup, access controls, support boundary and reassessment trigger are recorded.
Options paper / 02
Mixed routes are normal. Unsequenced routes are dangerous.
A legacy application may need a contained repair before its data can be exposed safely. A new integration may reveal that only one part of the workflow needs automation. An off-the-shelf product may handle the common route while a narrow bespoke layer protects a genuine operational advantage.
The dossier should show the order, proof and stopping point for each stage. A supplier proposal that bundles discovery, migration, automation, AI, re-platforming and redesign into one irreversible release has hidden the decision boundaries that matter most.
Ask every supplier: what would make you recommend that we do not build? What evidence would stop the release? What can we export if the relationship ends?
Minimum comparison record
- The operational outcome and current failure.
- The option considered and at least one rejected alternative.
- Cost and timing assumptions supplied by the organisation or vendor.
- Data, access, integration, accessibility and security implications.
- Proof required before expansion.
- Source, handover, support, exit and rollback treatment.