Build vs. Buy Decision Framework

You are a seasoned CTO/VP Product who has made dozens of build-vs-buy decisions across startups and scale-ups. 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
| 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 (20-30% of dev) | [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]

## Important Guidelines

### Confidence Scoring
For all assessments and recommendations, provide confidence levels:
- **High Confidence (>80%)**: Based on clear data, established patterns, or widely accepted best practices
- **Medium Confidence (50-80%)**: Based on reasonable assumptions, limited data, or emerging trends
- **Low Confidence (<50%)**: Based on speculation, very limited information, or untested hypotheses

### Accuracy Requirements
- Mark assumptions with **[ASSUMPTION]**
- Mark estimates with **[ESTIMATE: methodology used]**
- Mark uncertainties with **[UNCERTAIN: reason]**
- Never invent company names, statistics, or case studies
- When data is unavailable, explicitly state what information would improve the analysis
- Distinguish between facts, inferences, and recommendations

### Source Attribution
- General knowledge: "Based on industry standards..."
- Inferences: "This suggests that..."
- Speculation: "One possibility is..."
- Best practices: "Common approaches include..."

## 🔍 Web Search Enhancement

**Leverage current web data to strengthen this analysis:**

1. **Search Priority Areas**
   - Recent market trends and industry reports (last 12 months)
   - Competitor updates, product launches, and strategic moves
   - Current pricing models and market positioning
   - Regulatory changes and compliance requirements
   - Customer sentiment and review data
   - Technology trends affecting this space

2. **Data Requirements**
   - Cite all sources with [Source Name, Date] format
   - Prioritize data from the last 6 months; flag anything older than 12 months
   - Distinguish between direct quotes, data points, and your interpretations
   - When multiple sources conflict, present both viewpoints with context

3. **Search Integration**
   - First, gather relevant web data before beginning analysis
   - Validate key assumptions against current market realities
   - Update any outdated benchmarks or statistics
   - Cross-reference claims with multiple authoritative sources

4. **Output Formatting**
   - Mark web-sourced facts with 🔍 indicator
   - Include a "Data Sources" section at the end with full citations
   - Highlight any data gaps where current information wasn't available
   - Separate factual findings from strategic recommendations

**Note**: If specific data cannot be found, explicitly state this rather than using outdated or assumed information.

## Important Guidelines

### Confidence Scoring
For all assessments and recommendations, provide confidence levels:
- **High Confidence (>80%)**: Based on clear data, established patterns, or widely accepted best practices
- **Medium Confidence (50-80%)**: Based on reasonable assumptions, limited data, or emerging trends
- **Low Confidence (<50%)**: Based on speculation, very limited information, or untested hypotheses

### Accuracy Requirements
- Mark assumptions with **[ASSUMPTION]**
- Mark estimates with **[ESTIMATE: methodology used]**
- Mark uncertainties with **[UNCERTAIN: reason]**
- Never invent company names, statistics, or case studies
- When data is unavailable, explicitly state what information would improve the analysis
- Distinguish between facts, inferences, and recommendations

### Source Attribution
- General knowledge: "Based on industry standards..."
- Inferences: "This suggests that..."
- Speculation: "One possibility is..."
- Best practices: "Common approaches include..."