%20(1)_11zon-2.jpeg?width=1280&height=720&name=61a37f2365af7a4177e1b92a_61a0a06512b5055849fe72bc_toa-heftiba-_UIVmIBB3JU-unsplash%20(1)%20(1)_11zon-2.jpeg)
We often come across these discussions and tendencies to choose between "platform or best-in-breed" solutions as one's strategy for choosing which tools or vendors to select.
The problem with the whole discussion is that too often the discussion itself becomes what determines the decision, not the actual needs that were the starting point of the initiative. But let's come back to our angle on the problem.
What is best?
A simple question, but what is best, an all-in-one platform or best-in-breed? What is your experience? But it is rather impossible to answer as the answer is individual to the business to which the answer is to be applied.
Which systems are best suited to the needs of an organization? Should you give different departments the freedom to choose their own applications based on their own perceived needs and wishes or should you buy into a platform that offers the necessary applications to each department with the hope that life will be easier then, if everything is in the same system?
Choosing in the system architecture is a bit like planning a vacation. Should you go with an "all inclusive package" with a range of integrated applications from one and the same provider, or plan your own trip, the so-called "Best-in-breed" approach.
If you are looking for the optimal solution in each area of activity, the 'best-in-breed' options usually provide specific functionality and satisfy specific roles and functions well as the whole system is built with one or a few values in focus. The speed of solving specific challenges and satisfying employees makes best-in-breed attractive. In terms of price, it can be easier decisions that do not cut the budget. The challenges come when the system is to interact in a larger context where information cannot flow between functions and departments, where integration projects become year-long projects, data quality suffers and a quick survey shows that you have X number of systems that do roughly the same things or at least on paper have the ability to handle the same type of tasks.
The platform solution that likes to emphasize the 360 view of the customer, the project, the economy, etc., with a large number of integrated applications with a common database and a consistent user interface so that all modules have a familiar look and feel can be tempting to "make order out of chaos". The downside, however, is that you have to adapt to the functionality and possibilities available within the platform instead of starting from the need and choosing the platform that meets the requirements. It is almost always an extensive project that requires a large financial investment. In addition, large parts of the business are directly or indirectly affected by the project.
-2.png?width=383&height=324&name=61a37f23f871e3b4b3e1608a_61a0a06512b5051f63fe72bd_undraw_Choice_re_2hkp%20(1)-2.png)
Which of these solutions is best for your business?
Of course, both models have pros and cons and may suit some businesses better than others. Here are some factors to consider when making your choice:
Advantages of an all-in-one platform
-
One counterparty and one system, which simplifies administration and management
-
A seemingly simpler system architecture in the organization with one or a few business-critical systems
-
A more uniform interface and recognition for users
-
Simplified training and adoption
-
Easier skills provision and development and the ability to build internal teams
Disadvantages of an "all-in-one" platform
-
Reduced flexibility and system limitations may become more apparent.
-
Important to have integrations and broad support from 3rd party solutions.
-
Extra cost for features you don't necessarily need
-
Lack of development pace in low-priority areas from the system provider.
-
Less customized platform for each individual department
-
A higher investment cost with longer and more complex implementation projects
-
Greater impact (positive and negative) on the whole business with "more eggs in the same basket"
Things to consider if you choose "All-in-one"
If you choose the platform option, it is important to include stakeholders from all affected departments, so that they have the opportunity to influence the decision in the procurement project. This can make a procurement project more complicated and time-consuming but it is a key to success to get buy-in from all affected parts of the business. This will lead to a smoother implementation and greater understanding of the lack of flexibility in the applications included in the platform.
-2.png?width=525&height=371&name=61a37f238ec3952a529a4ab7_61a0a06512b5051331fe72c0_undraw_Brainstorming_re_1lmw%20(1)-2.png)
Benefits of a best-in-breed platform
-
Creates greater flexibility and reduced risk as there are fewer dependencies.
-
Niche and focused on solving specific problems
-
Generally higher user satisfaction and easier adaptation (greater ownership from departments)
-
Generally less investment required for the specific case which shortens decision times and leads to smaller implementation projects with fewer stakeholders to consider.
Disadvantages of a "Best-in-breed" platform
-
Can lead to fragmented customer data spread across multiple platforms
-
Unclear ownership and responsibility for both systems and processes
-
More and more integration needs
-
Can lead to more complex skills supply with broader training and support needs
-
More supplier relationships with different contracts and increased administration.
Things to consider if you choose best-in-breed
If you follow the best-in-breed option, you are likely to end up with a sprawling architecture consisting of different system tools and services, possibly built on different technologies and developed in different languages. Unfortunately, interoperability is still not a given between different platforms, and even when products claim to be compatible with standards, there are often integration problems. Two products that work well when isolated can create problems when brought together.
It is important that you take into account any development costs and consultancy needs involved in this option. Such a landscape places higher demands on clear processes and their ownership, understanding of data flows and possible investment requirements in integration projects.
-2.png?width=490&height=393&name=61a37f235ff09c4d123fb850_61a0a06512b505d473fe72c1_undraw_new_ideas_jdea%20(1)-2.png)
The alternative
The challenge of pitting these two extremes against each other is not new, the pendulum has swung many times as trends, but our view is that the complexity of the issue has increased as there are more and more different solutions on the market and many solutions become broader in what type of functionality they deliver.
The problem that quickly arises when you set the two alternative paths against each other is that it quickly becomes polarized and the focus is shifted from the problem to be solved and for whom you make the change to one or the other "side" to "win". If the focus can be kept on who you are making the change for, which hopefully in the end is the customer (and thus the business), more pragmatic solutions are possible that can include both platform and best in breed solutions, simultaneously. By creating a digital architecture that creates flexibility and reduces dependency on individual solutions, both strategies can exist simultaneously and in total create a better solution than either one or the other alone could have achieved.
With a proper needs analysis as a starting point, a platform can be chosen to deliver key functions. In cases where the business prefers "best in breed" in some areas and it is economically justifiable, it can be allowed as long as they integrate and interact with the main platform.
To create the conditions for this type of modularized and integrated architecture, there are a few more tools that enable this.
Integration platform
The integration platform is crucial to effectively integrate many different data sources and create control and security through the flow of information.
Customer Data Platform
The more places customer data is stored in, the more difficult it becomes to ensure data quality, integrity and security. Here, the role of the CDP is to be the central location for all information relating to a customer or individual and from where rights to the various linked systems are controlled. This makes it easier to give each system in the chain the opportunity to do what it is good at and created for. For example, for the CRM to manage relationships with the various stakeholders the organization has, for the Marketing Automation system to manage communication in a personal and relevant way, the ERP system to manage economic and financial relationships such as orders, returns, logistics, etc. All parts are needed to effectively manage a "customer life cycle" from first touch to long-term customer relationship and even beyond.
Our recommendation
Avoid locking the discussion to one or the other strategy but work pragmatically on the problem to be solved and how it can be best achieved from the perspective of the different stakeholders. If there is not a crystal clear option that meets all needs, solve the individual problems that are easy (low hanging fruits) first and rather create the conditions needed to solve the whole, i.e. a solution architecture that creates room for change through efficiency and flexibility and reduces lock-in effects.
The best way forward is to start doing things and learn along the way. It is difficult to set relevant requirements and define a desired state if it requires too long a journey that the business cannot take on board. Instead, set a level of ambition for the future and make sure to start moving in the direction it implies. Focus on increasing the propensity for change and thus the pace of change within the organization and the goal will soon be closer and more realistic.
.jpeg)
