604.506.5068
Build vs Buy in GenAI: Why Strategic Partnerships Win
The report highlights a consistent pattern: externally partnered implementations succeed more often than internal builds—and adoption tends to be higher.
The shift happening now
Top buyers are starting to treat GenAI vendors like business service providers (BPO/consulting-like accountability), not like standard SaaS tools.
Why “build” is harder than it looks
Internal builds often suffer from slow iteration, brittle workflow logic, and a lack of sustained learning loops. Even with strong teams,
production-grade reliability across edge cases is difficult—especially when workflows change quarterly.
What executives actually want from GenAI vendors
Top selection criteria
- A vendor they trust
- Deep understanding of workflow
- Minimal disruption to current tools
- Clear data boundaries
- Ability to improve over time
What “good” looks like in practice
A tool that plugs into existing systems, reduces manual work immediately, and gets better through feedback—without forcing teams to change everything.
A procurement-ready evaluation framework
- Workflow fit: Can it handle your approvals/data flows as they are?
- Time-to-value: Can it deliver visible impact in 30–90 days?
- Learning loops: Does it retain feedback and reduce repeat mistakes?
- Integration: Does it plug into your CRM/ERP/portals?
- Security & boundaries: Can you control data access and leakage risk?
Pro tip
If a vendor can’t explain how the system learns from your environment and improves, you’re likely buying a static tool that will stall after the pilot.
Want help evaluating GenAI vendors and choosing the right path?
We’ll align vendor selection to your operations, risk requirements, and measurable outcomes.
