In today’s software landscape, offering seamless, integrated features isn’t just a bonus—it’s an expectation. As an HR, payroll, accounting, or ERP provider, your customers expect solutions that work effortlessly within your platform.The challenge isn’t necessarily identifying what your customers need—they are usually quite good at telling you—but how you’ll deliver it. When a feature sits just outside your core offer, you are faced with three main approaches to consider:
- Build in-house
- Leverage marketplaces and app stores
- Partner with a tech vendor
Each approach has pros and cons. This blog will help you assess which path best aligns with your business priorities and customer expectations.
Option 1: In-house development – the full commitment
Developing a feature in-house means full control over every aspect of product development, from branding to user experience and roadmap alignment. It ensures deep integration with your core product and allows you to tailor solutions precisely to your customers’ needs.
Pros
- Complete branded experience: The feature lives within your platform, reinforcing brand loyalty from customers.
- Seamless platform alignment Ensures the feature integrates tightly with your core offering, ensuring consistency and quality.
- Stronger customer retention: Meeting customer needs directly in your ecosystem reduces churn.
- Direct revenue generation: You create ongoing revenue streams instead of earning one-time referral fees.
- Deeper customisation: Enables tailored integrations to fit unique business requirements, ensuring optimal functionality and flexibility.
- Streamlined user experience: A unified product portfolio minimises friction, delivering a cohesive experience with a single login and branded interfaces.
- Control over the roadmap: You determine feature enhancements, updates, and future development to align with customer needs and market trends—without relying on external providers.
Cons
- High development cost: Significant upfront investment is required, especially if it falls outside your core expertise.
- Continuous innovation required: Keeping the product up to market standards requires continuous innovation and development efforts.
- Scalability challenges: Expanding and maintaining the solution at scale as your business grows can be complex.
- Longer time-to-market: Developing in-house solutions often takes longer compared to third-party alternatives.
- Maintenance burden: You are responsible for ongoing updates, compliance, and security measures.
- Potential loss of focus: Diverting resources to a non-core feature can reduce focus from your primary offering.
When in-house development makes sense
- If the feature is core to your value proposition and competitive advantage.
- If you have the resources to develop, continuously improve, and maintain it long-term.
Option 2: Leverage marketplaces and app stores – the hands-off approach
Marketplaces provide a convenient way to expand your product’s capabilities without big investments in development. Customers can browse third-party features and choose tools that suit their needs.
Pros
- Ease of implementation: Minimal development or maintenance is required on your end.
- Wide range of solutions: Customers have access to a variety of tools, allowing them to choose what suits them best.
- Lower costs: Reduces the need for internal development and operational expenses by leveraging third-party solutions.
- Speed to market: Allows for a fast way to provide access to additional features.
Cons
- Minimal revenue potential: You might earn a referral fee, but the long-term revenue opportunities are limited.
- No influence over user experience: You can’t manage the customer experience, which could lead to inconsistent branding or usability.
- Fragmented user journey: Customers must navigate different platforms, logins, and interfaces, creating a less cohesive experience.
- Customer retention risk: Customers engaging with external vendors may be more likely to churn.
- Lack of unique selling proposition: Using standardised, third-party solutions often limits differentiation in a competitive market.
- Dependency on vendors: You rely on third-party providers for feature evolution and pricing structures.
When marketplaces and app stores make sense
- If the feature is non-essential to your core business.
- If you want to quickly offer optional add-ons without significant development effort.
Option 3: Partnering with a tech vendor – In-house without the hassle
Partnering with a technology vendor allows you to offer in-house-quality features without the heavy development burden. This approach provides flexibility, scalability, and control while benefiting from a technology partner’s expertise. This can be achieved through two flexible options:
- Embedded API solutions: Integrate specific functionalities into your platform via API, ensuring deep customisation and seamless user experience while maintaining full brand control.
- White-label solutions: Launch a fully developed, ready-to-use product in your brand, expanding your product offering without the complexity of in-house development.
Pros
- Branded, seamless experience: Customers experience the feature as a native part of your platform.
- Faster time-to-market: No need for lengthy in-house development cycles.
- Lower maintenance burden: A technology partner handles updates, compliance, and improvements.
- Continuous innovation: Stay competitive with ongoing advancements from your technology partner.
- Improved customer retention: Keeping customers within your ecosystem increases engagement and long-term loyalty.
- New revenue streams: Creates recurring revenue opportunities.
- Flexible customisation: Allows you to tailor the feature to your customers’ needs without full-scale development.
- Streamlined user experience: A unified interface ensures a frictionless customer journey.
- Consistent customer experience: Maintain a consistent brand presence and integration quality while leveraging external expertise.
Cons
- Initial integration effort required: While easier than full development, the setup often requires an initial investment.
- Dependency on a partner: You rely on the provider’s roadmap and updates.
When partnering with a tech vendor makes sense - the middle ground
Partnering with a tech vendor offers the best of both worlds without the hassle. It allows you to maintain brand consistency and a seamless user experience while accelerating time to market and reducing the complexities of development and ongoing maintenance.
Key decision factors – which approach is right for you?
Choosing the right approach for delivering additional features is a strategic decision that impacts customer experience, retention, and your bottom line. Whether you build in-house, leverage a marketplace, or partner with a tech vendor, the right choice depends on your priorities and resources. To help guide your decision, consider these key questions:
How core is this feature to your business?
- If core → In-house
- If important but not core → Tech partner
- If non-essential → Marketplace
How much influence do you need over product development?
- Full influence over feature evolution and updates → In-house
- Shared influence with expert → Tech partner
- No influence is acceptable → Marketplace
What’s your long-term budget and development capacity?
- Significant resources → In-house
- Limited resources → Tech partner
How quickly do you need to launch?
Conclusion: scale faster and smarter with a tech partner
Each approach has advantages and challenges, and the decision depends on your business priorities. For many providers, the right choice isn’t black and white—it’s about finding the right balance between control, cost, and scalability for a specific feature.
The key is to align your choice with your business goals, customer expectations, and available resources. If maintaining a seamless user experience and brand consistency for a feature is a top priority but you lack the capacity for full in-house development, partnering with a tech vendor offers an ideal middle-ground.
By integrating best-in-class technology from a trusted partner, you can enhance your product portfolio, ensure ongoing feature innovation, improve customer retention, and drive new revenue streams—all while maintaining a strong brand presence and reducing development complexity and long-term maintenance efforts.
One example – expense management: a key feature for software providers
For many software providers, some features are essential for customers but don’t justify full in-house development. A great example of this is expense management, which is often a critical yet non-core feature for HR, payroll, accounting, and ERP providers. Customers expect a seamless solution, but in-house development can divert resources from your core offering.
This is where a tech partner is an ideal solution. By integrating a best-in-class expense management solution like Findity’s, software providers can deliver the functionality customers demand while avoiding the complexity of full-scale development.
Ready to take the next step? Explore how Findity’s expense management solutions can enhance your product portfolio. Book a demo today.