I understand that some features we build will be very large and require a lot of time and effort to maintain and keep running at the quality we expect. This is normal. I understand that some vendors actually do some things really well and we may have to pay a lot of money for their services since what they provide is so valuable. This is normal. But to pay someone a lot of money for their services, and also spend a lot of time keeping it working, is the fastest way to get on my cut list; somehow for many this has become normal and it shouldn't be.
Yep, its always a cost/benefit - I will dedicate eng time to your tool if I get >10x the value, but there's plenty of vendors who want you to dedicate a resource and pay them 20k a month for something that at that price point you could just maintain and have better alignment with your needs.
It’s insightful to hear your perspective on the balance between cost and effort in maintaining valuable services. It raises an important question about the long-term value we seek from vendors. Have you considered alternative strategies that might alleviate some of that maintenance burden while still respecting the value these services provide? Engaging in thoughtful dialogue about refining vendor relationships could lead to more sustainable solutions for everyone involved.
Erwin Alberto
4mo
Could it be that the service/tool is also not the right tool thus leading to more time spent in keeping it working? Either way, I think doing away with the tool/service is the right approach here.
Andy Skupen
4mo
I like Ben. Be like Ben.
Djangonaut, Pythonista, Novelist, Automator of processes
4moYes. Hard-learned lessons: in the build vs buy question, the worst possible answer is "both".