These run your business but don't differentiate it. Everyone needs them. Nobody wins because of them. Off-the-shelf is the right call.
Think: Payroll, email, basic HR, accounting, CRM basics
For decades, buying software was cheaper than building it. That was true, until AI collapsed build timelines from months to weeks. Now, the real cost isn't building. It's buying generic software and bending your business to fit it.
The build vs buy question was never meant to be one-size-fits-all. There are three kinds of business systems, and each one demands a different answer. Most companies get this wrong because they apply the same logic to all three.
The mistake most enterprises make is treating all technology decisions the same way. Payroll and your competitive edge are not the same kind of problem; they shouldn't get the same kind of solution.
These run your business but don't differentiate it. Everyone needs them. Nobody wins because of them. Off-the-shelf is the right call.
These are where you create competitive advantage. If you buy generic software here, you're literally buying the same capabilities as your competitors.
These don't exist yet. No vendor sells what hasn't been imagined. If differentiation is the entire point, building is the only option.
Gartner predicts that by 2030, 40% of enterprise applications will be custom-built using AI-native platforms, up from just 2% in 2025. The shift isn't coming. It's here.
The economics that made "buy" the default answer for 20 years were based on a specific reality: building took too long, cost too much, and quality was a gamble. AI-native platforms changed all three at once.
4–6 month cycles. 4–6 weeks just for teams to understand your business. Quality depended on which developers you got. If they left, the knowledge left with them. Building meant risk.
6–8 week cycles. Less than a week to full context, because the platform remembers. Quality is consistent because it's encoded, not personal. Knowledge compounds. Building means advantage.
The question is no longer
can we afford to build?
It's can we afford not to?
The new economics of enterprise software
Ask one question: does this system give us a competitive edge? If the answer is no, buy it. If the answer is yes, build it. If the answer is "we're not sure yet," that's usually a build.
When you buy software for something that should be your competitive advantage, you don't just get a product. You get constraints. Your processes bend to fit the vendor's design. Your team spends months in implementation and customization. Your roadmap becomes their roadmap.
And here's the part nobody talks about: your competitor bought the same software. You've just paid to guarantee you won't be different.
The hidden costs add up fast: license fees that increase annually, customization that takes longer than building, vendor lock-in that limits your options, and the opportunity cost of conforming your business to someone else's idea of how it should work.
For commodity systems, that's a fine trade-off. For the things that make you competitive? It's a trap.
Kaara's Compounding Build model makes building faster, cheaper, and smarter with every engagement. Your first project takes weeks, not months. Your second takes less.