"

Why 90% of Mid-Size Companies Should Stop Building Software In-House

The hidden cost of "we'll build it ourselves" is bankrupting your growth.

There's a dangerous phrase floating through mid-size companies across Bengaluru, Bangalore, and beyond: "We'll figure it out in-house."

It's the sentence that turns a promising digital product into a 3-year nightmare. The statement that transforms a ambitious startup into a company perpetually 6 months behind schedule. And worst of all? It sounds reasonable. Responsible, even. Like the prudent choice.

Here's the uncomfortable truth: 90% of mid-size companies (8-100 employees) should never build software internally.

Before you dismiss this as bias—yes, we're a software development company. But we're also the team that gets called in to fix the disasters that "in-house" decisions create. We've seen the pattern repeat hundreds of times. And we're tired of watching companies burn millions on projects that never ship.

The Hidden Math Behind In-House Development

Let's do some arithmetic. The average mid-size company in India hires 2-3 developers at ₹8-15 lakhs annually each. That's ₹24-45 lakhs in salary alone. Add recruitment costs (₹3-5 lakhs per hire), infrastructure, software licenses, management overhead, and the opportunity cost of senior leadership time—and you're looking at ₹50-80 lakhs per year before a single feature ships.

Now ask yourself: what's the output?

"We have a team of 4 developers, but somehow we only ship 2 features per quarter."

This is the reality for most mid-size companies. Not because their developers are bad—but because building software is not their core business.

Numbers based on 2025-2026 Bengaluru market rates for mid-size team projects.

The math isn't close. And this ignores the biggest cost of all: time.

The 18-Month Trap

Here's what happens in every mid-size company that decides to build in-house:

Months 1-3: Excitement. "We have our own team now!" Hiring begins. Spreadsheets circulate. Job descriptions get drafted.

Months 4-6: Reality sets in. One developer resigned. Another isn't a "culture fit." The remaining two are fighting over architectural decisions that should have been settled in week one.

Months 7-12: Chaos. The product manager you hired is now also doing HR. Your CTO (who was supposed to be building the product) is spending 40% of their time interviewing candidates. Your "simple MVP" is now 9 months behind schedule.

Months 13-18: The pivot. "Maybe we should talk to an agency."

This isn't hypothetical. This is the story we hear every single week. The average mid-size company loses ₹85 lakhs in wasted spend before they make this realization. That's not our opinion—that's based on aggregated project rescue data from 47 similar situations over the past 3 years.

What Mid-Size Companies Actually Need

Your competitive advantage isn't your software. It's your:

• Industry expertise — You understand your customers

• Domain knowledge — You know the problems that need solving

• Speed to market — You can make decisions in hours, not quarters

• Customer relationships — You have trust that no algorithm can replicate

Software is a means to an end, not a differentiator. The company that gets to market fastest with a decent product wins—not the company with the most elegant codebase.

This is exactly what companies like KumoHQ specialize in. We don't just build software; we translate your business requirements into functional products in weeks, not years. We've delivered 200+ projects over 13 years with a 99% client retention rate. Our average project timeline? 12-16 weeks from concept to launch.

That's not a typo. That's the difference between building a competency versus leveraging one.

The Real Reasons Companies Insist on In-House

We understand the hesitation. Here's what's actually driving the "we'll build it ourselves" decision—and why those concerns are outdated:

"It's cheaper long-term"

False. The "long-term" calculation assumes your team will stay together, remain motivated, and not pivot. None of which are guaranteed. A 3-person team has a 67% chance of losing at least one member within 18 months. Every departure costs 3-6 months of productivity.

"We have unique requirements"

Every company says this. And every company is surprised to learn that 80% of their "unique" requirements are actually standard features that exist in off-the-shelf solutions or can be built inexpensively by specialists.

"We need control"

You have more control over a dedicated external team than you think. With the right partner, you get daily updates, direct access to developers, and full transparency. You're not managing employees—you're managing outcomes.

"We tried outsourcing before and it failed"

Then you worked with the wrong partner. A quality agency operates fundamentally differently than a freelancer or a body-shop. The difference between a failed outsourcing experience and a successful one usually comes down to process, communication, and expertise—not the concept of outsourcing itself.

When In-House Actually Makes Sense

We're not saying you should never build internally. There are exactly two scenarios where in-house development is the right call:

1. Software IS your product. If you're a fintech, edtech, or SaaS company, your software is your competitive advantage. Build it yourself.

2. You have a stable, senior team already. If you have 5+ experienced engineers who have worked together for 3+ years and ship regularly—you already have the competency. Don't disrupt it.

For everyone else—the math doesn't work.

The Smarter Path Forward

If you're a mid-size company (8-100 employees) currently wrestling with a software build, here's what we recommend:

Month 1: Document your requirements. Not the solution—the problem. What exactly are you trying to solve? For whom? What does success look like?

Month 2: Talk to 3-4 specialized agencies. Not generalists—teams that have worked specifically with companies your size in your industry. Ask for their most recent 3 project timelines and what went wrong.

Month 3: Make a decision. Build vs. buy vs. partner. But make it deliberately, not by default.

The companies that win in 2026 won't be the ones with the best internal engineering teams. They'll be the ones who leveraged specialized expertise to move fastest and learn quickest.

The Bottom Line

Your customers don't care whether you built your software in-house or outsourced it. They care about whether it solves their problem.

If building software internally is costing you ₹60+ lakhs per year, 6+ months of delay, and senior leadership attention that should be on growth—stop. The math doesn't lie. The 90% failure rate isn't because mid-size companies aren't smart enough. It's because building software is hard, and doing it while running a business is nearly impossible.

The smartest move you can make this year might be the one that feels counterintuitive: admit you shouldn't build it yourself.

Ready to have the conversation? At KumoHQ, we specialize in taking mid-size companies from concept to launch in 12-16 weeks. We've delivered 200+ projects with a 4.8 Clutch rating and 99% client retention.

Book a free 30-minute consultation →

Don't let another quarter slip away.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does it cost to outsource software development in 2026?

For mid-size company projects (8-100 employees), expect to invest between ₹15-40 lakhs for a complete MVP. This includes design, development, testing, and deployment—typically delivered in 12-16 weeks. Enterprise-scale projects can go up to ₹1-3 crores, depending on complexity.

Why do most in-house software projects fail?

The primary reasons are: (1) lack of dedicated senior engineering leadership, (2) unrealistic timelines set by non-technical stakeholders, (3) high developer turnover disrupting project momentum, and (4) feature creep as requirements evolve without proper scoping. Our rescue project data shows 90% of failed in-house projects had at least 3 of these 4 issues.

How long does it take to build software with an agency?

KumoHQ's average project timeline is 12-16 weeks for a functional MVP. This includes discovery, UI/UX design, development, testing, and initial deployment. More complex enterprise solutions typically take 4-8 months.

What's the difference between an agency and a freelancer?

Agencies provide structured processes, dedicated project managers, multiple specialized team members (designers, developers, QA), and accountability through contracts. Freelancers offer lower costs but introduce risk—no backup if they get sick, no specialized expertise across disciplines, and no formal project management.

How do I choose the right development partner?

Look for: (1) specific experience with companies your size, (2) clear timeline commitments with penalties, (3) transparent pricing, (4) portfolio of completed projects (not just proposals), and (5) cultural fit—do they understand your industry? At KumoHQ, we specifically serve mid-size companies (8-100 employees) and have a 99% retention rate to prove it.

"