Your business isn’t technology. Maybe you’re in manufacturing, logistics, finance, healthcare, energy, or retail. You’re world-class at what you do — moving products, managing assets, serving customers, delivering results. But somewhere along the way, software stopped being optional. It became oxygen. You need platforms to optimise operations, systems to track performance, dashboards to make decisions, and integrations to connect everything. Software has gone from “nice to have” to “we can’t function without it.” So you face a choice: in-house vs outsourcing software development through a specialised partner.
Most companies default to hiring. It feels logical. Bring expertise in-house, maintain control, build institutional knowledge. But here’s what they don’t consider: running a software engineering function is a completely different business than running your core operation.
When Software Becomes Core — But Isn’t Your Core Business
Let me give you a real example. We work with one of the world’s leading workforce solutions companies. Their expertise? Recruitment and talent assessment. They’ve been doing it for decades, and they’re exceptional at it.
But in today’s world, recruitment isn’t just about identifying talent. It’s about having the right technology to assess, match, and place candidates at scale. So they needed a sophisticated psychological testing and assessment platform (Construct) that could be used in recruitment processes worldwide.
They faced a decision: build an internal IT team to develop and maintain this mission-critical software, or partner with a specialised software engineering company.
They chose to partner with Q.
Why? Because even though software had become central to their recruitment process, building and managing a world-class software engineering team would have meant building a second business inside their first one.
They are brilliant at recruitment. They understand candidate psychology, labour market dynamics, and organisational needs better than anyone. But hiring React developers? Managing DevOps infrastructure? Building competency frameworks for software engineers? That’s a completely different game.
By partnering with us and outsourcing software development, they got:
- A dedicated team that understands their domain and business requirements
- Access to specialised expertise across multiple technologies
- Scalability to ramp up or down based on project needs
- Continuity, even when individual engineers move between projects
- Best practices from a company that builds software for dozens of clients simultaneously
And the final result is? A platform that serves their global operations, built and maintained by people who live and breathe software engineering, while our partner stays focused on what they do best.
This is the model that works. Not because outsourcing is always better, but because trying to build a parallel software engineering business inside your core business dilutes both.
We have the same experience with companies in Oil and Gas, Media and Publishing, Pharmaceutical, and Hospitality, and this approach is applicable for all industries that aren’t in their core software engineering industries.
Honest Recommendation: Keep a Small Core, Outsource the Rest
It’s no secret that running a competitive software engineering team is demanding, and that most non-tech companies struggle with it.
After seeing hundreds of companies struggle with this decision, here’s what works when deciding between in-house vs outsourcing software development:
Build a small, internal IT core team. Often just 1-2 people who:
- Deeply understand your business and industry
- Set technical strategy aligned with business goals
- Act as the bridge between operations and engineering
- Own the relationship with your technology partners
- Make build vs. buy decisions
- Function as Product Owner or Product Manager
You don’t need a CTO, VP of Engineering, or elaborate technical leadership structure. For most non-tech companies, a strong Product Owner or Product Manager who understands both your business and technology is enough. They define what needs to be built and why. Your specialised partner figures out how to build it.
This core person (or small team) provides strategic direction and ensures technology serves your business needs.
Outsource execution to a specialised partner who:
- Brings the right expertise at the right time
- Provides the technical leadership (architects, tech leads, engineering managers)
- Scales up or down based on project needs
- Maintains continuity even when individual engineers rotate
- Handles hiring, retention, training, and career development
- Brings best practices from across dozens of clients
This gives you:
- Control without overhead – you set direction, they execute
- Strategy without management burden – no HR headaches, performance reviews, or career development programs to build
- Capability without commitment – access specialists without full-time salaries
- Technical leadership without executive salaries – leverage their CTOs, architects, and senior engineers
- Knowledge without key person risk – multiple people understand your systems
- Quality without building infrastructure – leverage their engineering practices, code review processes, and technical standards
Think of it this way: your Product Owner defines the “what” and “why.” Your specialised partner provides the “how” and “who.”
You don’t need to hire a CTO making €150K+ to manage 3 engineers. You need someone who understands your business deeply enough to translate operational needs into technical requirements. That person can be a strong Product Manager, a business analyst with technical fluency, or even an operations leader who’s tech-savvy.
The heavy technical lifting: architecture decisions, technology selections, engineering best practices, team leadership. All that comes from your partner who does this full-time across dozens of clients.
The Economics Make Sense Too
Let’s run the numbers on building an internal team of 10 engineers:
Direct Costs:
- 10 engineers × €70K average salary = €700K
- Taxes and benefits (40%) = €280K
- Office space, equipment, tools = €100K
- Recruiting (10% of salary) = €70K
- Total: ~€1.15M per year
Hidden Costs:
- HR time managing performance, career development, compensation
- Technical leadership to guide architecture and mentor engineers
- Training budget for continuous learning
- Turnover cost (replacement typically takes 3-6 months, during which you’re understaffed)
- Opportunity cost of bad hires or wrong technical decisions
What You Get:
- Limited technology breadth
- Knowledge is concentrated in a few people
- Career path challenges leading to retention issues
- Isolation from industry best practices
Compare this to partnering with a specialised firm:
- Similar or lower cost for equivalent capacity
- Access to broader expertise
- Shared knowledge across multiple engineers
- Built-in continuity and redundancy
- No HR overhead
- Ability to scale up/down based on needs
The economics aren’t even close. Unless software engineering is truly core to your competitive advantage (like it is for Google, Netflix, or Spotify), building this in-house doesn’t make financial sense.
A Note for Startups
If you’re an early-stage startup, the advice is more nuanced than “always build in-house” or “always outsource.”
In the very beginning: pre-funding, pre-product-market fit don’t outsource your core product development.
At this stage, you need:
- Tight feedback loops between product, engineering, and customers
- Rapid iteration to find product-market fit
- People who are all-in on your mission and vision
- Speed over perfection – you’re learning, not optimizing
Outsourcing at this stage creates distance between you and your product. It’s also more expensive because you’re still figuring out what to build, which means constant changes and pivots.
But here’s what smart startups do: they bring in a specialised partner at the very start to set the foundation.
Before you hire your first in-house engineer, partner with a company like Q for 2-3 months to:
- Design the initial architecture – make the right technology choices from day one
- Set up pipelines and infrastructure – CI/CD, deployment automation, monitoring
- Establish coding standards – conventions, documentation practices, code review processes
- Create technical documentation – so future engineers can onboard quickly
- Define ways of working – agile ceremonies, sprint planning, ticket management
This gives you a professional foundation built by people who’ve done it hundreds of times. You avoid the most common early-stage mistakes:
- Choosing the wrong tech stack and having to rewrite later
- Building a monolith that can’t scale
- Accumulating technical debt from day one
- Creating systems nobody else can understand
Then, hire your first 1-3 in-house engineers who work within this well-architected foundation. They move fast, iterate on product, and stay close to customers, but they’re building on solid ground instead of making it up as they go.
When you hit stable funding and you’re ready to scale, that’s when you bring Q back in. You’ve proven product-market fit. Now you need:
- Execution velocity to capture the market opportunity
- Specialised expertise your small team doesn’t have
- Capacity to build multiple features in parallel
- Quality and reliability as you scale
Your small core team sets strategy and maintains the vision. Your Q partnership provides the execution horsepower, specialised skills, and engineering best practices to scale rapidly without breaking things.
This three-phase approach gives you:
- Professional foundation from experienced engineers
- Speed and agility from a lean in-house team
- Scale and expertise from a specialised partner
It’s the best of all worlds.
In-House vs Outsourcing Software Development: The Bottom Line
You became great at your industry by focusing relentlessly on your core business. Not by trying to simultaneously become a recruiting firm, an HR consultancy, a technology training academy, and a software engineering powerhouse.
Software is critical to your business. It enables everything you do. But running a world-class software engineering function is a business unto itself.
It requires:
- Specialised recruiting pipelines
- Competency frameworks and career ladders
- Performance management systems for technical roles
- Continuous learning infrastructure
- Technical leadership with deep expertise
- Communities of practice
- Centres of excellence that distill best practices across projects
Building all of this for a small internal IT team makes no sense. The ROI isn’t there. You’ll spend years and millions building mediocre versions of what specialised companies already do excellently.
Partner with people who’ve built the systems, processes, and culture to do software engineering right. Keep your focus on what you do best. Let them handle the rest.
So when it comes to in-house vs outsourcing software development, your customers don’t care whether your engineering team is internal or external. They care whether your product works, whether it solves their problems, and whether you’re innovating to serve them better.
That’s what you should be focused on. Not whether your engineers have growth opportunities or which CI/CD pipeline to use.
Your company in today’s world definitely needs software. But that doesn’t mean you need to become a software company. For that, you have us.
Give Kudos by sharing the post!
ABOUT AUTHOR
Hrvoje Gorajscan
Chief Executive Officer
