Lo-Code / No-Code - Where Does It Fit?

There are several factors that organizations should consider when deciding whether to use low-code or no-code platforms like Microsoft's Power Platform or to opt for traditional software development.

Size Matters

One key factor is the size and complexity of the organization. Smaller organizations may not have the resources or expertise to invest in a full-scale software development project and may therefore prefer to use a low-code or no-code platform to build custom applications. These platforms allegedly offer a more accessible and user-friendly interface for building apps, making it easier for non-technical users to create custom solutions without the need for coding skills.

Another factor to consider is the speed at which the organization needs to deploy its solutions. Low-code and no-code platforms claim to offer a much faster development cycle, as they provide pre-built components and templates that can be quickly assembled into functional applications. This makes them ideal for organizations that need to move quickly and iterate frequently, as they can quickly build and deploy prototypes and test new ideas without the need for extensive coding. However, it can be argued that if you have skilled software developers at your disposal, then empowering developers to control their own destiny can be equally as fast or faster than trying to develop within the constraints of some pre-packaged and strict vendor designed "best practice" development standards.

For organizations with limited budgets, low-code and no-code platforms can also be a more cost-effective option. These platforms often offer subscription-based pricing models, which can be more affordable than hiring a team of developers to build custom solutions from scratch. Additionally, low-code and no-code platforms typically require fewer resources to maintain and update, as they often include built-in tools for managing and updating applications.

Simplicity = Laggard vs. Complex = Innovator

On the other hand, there are also situations where traditional software development may be the better choice. For example, organizations with highly complex and customized requirements may need the flexibility and control that only custom software can provide. In these cases, low-code and no-code platforms may not be able to meet the organization's needs, and a more traditional development approach may be necessary.

Additionally, larger organizations that already have a team of software developers may prefer to use traditional development methods, as they may already have the necessary expertise and resources in-house. In these cases, it is almost always a more efficient route to utilize the organization's existing development team rather than relying on a low-code or no-code platform. Using a hybrid approach of mixing traditional software development with low-code/no-code development will just merely add more to your technical debt profile.

Overall, the decision between using a low-code or no-code platform and traditional software development will depend on the specific needs and resources of the organization. Smaller organizations with limited budgets and less complex requirements may find low-code and no-code platforms to be a more accessible and cost-effective option, while larger organizations with more complex requirements may need to rely on traditional software development methods. Ultimately, the right choice will depend on the organization's specific needs and priorities.

See Related: Buy vs. Build Discussions On Enterprise Software

Perhaps another way to look at the low-code / no code path vs traditional software development is comparing such to renting vs buying...with low-code / no code you are essentially renting a runtime for a fixed amount plus some additional per user fees, if your needs are basic enough then this might suffice, on the other hand with traditional software development you are buying the solution up front and enjoying far greater scalability with minimal runtime costs without the cost-prohibitive scalability constraints.

Long-Term Support, Stealth IT Enabler?

As cool as low-code no code platforms appear to be it's important to keep in mind that building and deploying solutions using low-code or no-code platforms can still require a significant time commitment. It's not uncommon for citizen developers to be working on these solutions in addition to their regular job duties, which can make it difficult to find time to build and manage the solutions. Additionally, while low-code and no-code platforms can be relatively easy to use, they may still require some technical knowledge and understanding of how to structure and design applications.

Could these platforms be the enabler of the notorious stealth IT? Should organizations promote and empower such citizen developers to build solutions against a backdrop of heightened cybersecurity concerns where there is a premium on knowing of and having confidence in the integrity of every transaction that enters the digital ecosystem. What happens when these citizen developers leave the organization or have their priorities change, does the maintenance and upkeep of these systems built get inherited by IT where it should have been all along? What does this do to the technical debt incurred by IT resources, now having to account for yet another skillset and overhead.