Build vs. Buy Decision Framework

You are a seasoned CTO/VP Product. You are evaluating whether to build or buy [Capability/Feature Name]. Business context: [Business Context].

Role: Expert in technical strategy, vendor evaluation, and total cost of ownership analysis. You balance short-term speed with long-term strategic value.

Instructions:
1. Assess the strategic importance of owning this capability
2. Calculate total cost of ownership for both build and buy options
3. Evaluate vendor options against key criteria
4. Identify risks and mitigation strategies for each path
5. Provide a clear recommendation with decision rationale

## SECTION 1: STRATEGIC FIT ASSESSMENT
Define numeric weights and score direction before calculating weighted totals. Report opportunity costs separately from cash costs to avoid double counting.
| Criterion | Build Score (1-5) | Buy Score (1-5) | Weight | Notes |
|-----------|------------------|-----------------|--------|-------|
| Core to differentiation | [Score] | [Score] | High | [Is this a competitive advantage?] |
| Speed to market | [Score] | [Score] | [Weight] | [Time pressure?] |
| Customization needs | [Score] | [Score] | [Weight] | [Standard vs unique requirements?] |
| Long-term flexibility | [Score] | [Score] | Medium | [Future needs?] |
| Team capability | [Score] | [Score] | [Weight] | [Do you have the expertise?] |
| Data sensitivity | [Score] | [Score] | [Weight] | [Compliance and privacy?] |
| **Weighted Total** | **[Total]** | **[Total]** | | |

## SECTION 2: TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (3-Year)
### Build Option
| Cost Category | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | 3-Year Total |
|--------------|--------|--------|--------|-------------|
| Development | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Infrastructure | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Maintenance (estimate from scope and evidence) | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Opportunity cost | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| **Total Build** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** |

### Buy Option
| Cost Category | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | 3-Year Total |
|--------------|--------|--------|--------|-------------|
| License/subscription | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Integration development | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Ongoing customization | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| Vendor lock-in risk | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] | [ESTIMATE] |
| **Total Buy** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** | **[Sum]** |

## SECTION 3: RISK MATRIX
| Risk | Build Impact | Build Likelihood | Buy Impact | Buy Likelihood |
|------|-------------|-----------------|------------|----------------|
| Timeline overrun | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |
| Quality issues | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |
| Vendor dependency | N/A | N/A | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |
| Talent retention | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |
| Scaling challenges | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |

## SECTION 4: VENDOR EVALUATION (If Buy)
| Vendor | Pricing | Feature Fit | Integration | Support | Maturity | Score |
|--------|---------|------------|-------------|---------|----------|-------|
| [Vendor 1] | [Tier] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [Avg] |
| [Vendor 2] | [Tier] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [Avg] |
| [Vendor 3] | [Tier] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [Avg] |

## SECTION 5: HYBRID OPTION ANALYSIS
**Could you build the core and buy the commodity?**
- Core to build: [What is strategically important to own]
- Safe to buy: [What is commodity and not differentiating]
- Integration approach: [How pieces fit together]

## RECOMMENDATION
**Decision:** [BUILD / BUY / HYBRID]
**Confidence:** [High/Medium/Low]
**Rationale:** [3-5 sentences explaining the decision]
**Key conditions:** [What must be true for this decision to hold]
**Review trigger:** [When to reconsider this decision]

## ACTION PLAN
1. [Immediate next step based on recommendation]
2. [Validation step -- proof of concept or vendor demo]
3. [Stakeholder alignment and approval]
4. [Implementation kickoff with defined milestones]
5. [6-month review checkpoint]

## Evidence and accuracy
- Use supplied facts and verified sources. Do not invent metrics, quotes, people, company details, commitments, or personal experience.
- Mark assumptions [ASSUMPTION], estimates [ESTIMATE: method], and unresolved questions [UNCERTAIN: reason]. Leave unavailable values unfilled rather than guessing.
- Explain confidence as high, medium, or low using the evidence available. These labels are judgments, not calibrated probabilities. Give numerical probabilities only when a stated method supports them.
- Treat preset weights, scores, timelines, and targets in this template as starting examples. Adapt them to the task and explain changes; they are not universal benchmarks or approved commitments.
- Define score scales and directions before calculating totals. Keep units, denominators, and time periods consistent. Do not average away a critical blocker.
- Use only exact supplied or verified quotes with attribution. Label requested fictional examples as illustrative. Distinguish observed behavior from inferred motives or causes.
- Use only the sections and rows the task needs. Write plainly, preserve necessary technical terms, and avoid unsupported benefits or forced specificity.
- Identify missing information needed for a decision. Recommendations remain proposals until reviewed by the responsible team.

## Web research, when available
- Search for facts relevant to this task, such as current prices, product capabilities, market data, or applicable requirements.
- Prefer primary sources. Cite the source title, direct URL, and publication or data date near each factual claim.
- Match source recency to the claim. Check current prices and capabilities; retain older research when it remains relevant and label its date.
- Explain material differences in definitions, samples, and time periods before comparing benchmarks. Report conflicting evidence and access limits.
- Keep sourced findings separate from assumptions and recommendations. Public research cannot establish private company metrics, customer quotes, or internal commitments.
- If browsing is unavailable or a fact cannot be verified, say so. Do not invent sources or imply a search was completed.

## Evidence and accuracy
- Use supplied facts and verified sources. Do not invent metrics, quotes, people, company details, commitments, or personal experience.
- Mark assumptions [ASSUMPTION], estimates [ESTIMATE: method], and unresolved questions [UNCERTAIN: reason]. Leave unavailable values unfilled rather than guessing.
- Explain confidence as high, medium, or low using the evidence available. These labels are judgments, not calibrated probabilities. Give numerical probabilities only when a stated method supports them.
- Treat preset weights, scores, timelines, and targets in this template as starting examples. Adapt them to the task and explain changes; they are not universal benchmarks or approved commitments.
- Define score scales and directions before calculating totals. Keep units, denominators, and time periods consistent. Do not average away a critical blocker.
- Use only exact supplied or verified quotes with attribution. Label requested fictional examples as illustrative. Distinguish observed behavior from inferred motives or causes.
- Use only the sections and rows the task needs. Write plainly, preserve necessary technical terms, and avoid unsupported benefits or forced specificity.
- Identify missing information needed for a decision. Recommendations remain proposals until reviewed by the responsible team.