The Build vs Buy Question Every CTO Gets Wrong

You've probably been stuck in this debate. Should we build our AI agent platform from scratch or buy an off-the-shelf solution? Your engineering team makes a compelling case for building: Complete control. Perfect alignment with your workflows. No vendor lock-in. It sounds good in the boardroom.

But this binary thinking is exactly what's slowing you down while your competitors ship AI features that users actually love.

The real question isn't build or buy AI. It's what should we build and what should we build on top of. That shift in perspective changes everything about how you approach AI infrastructure decisions and get products to market faster.

‍

Why the traditional build vs buy framework fails for AI

AI isn't a single product you can build or buy. It's a complex stack of foundation models, orchestration layers, memory systems, and deployment infrastructure. According to McKinsey research, trying to build all these layers from scratch typically takes 12 to 18 months before reaching full operational status.

When you frame the decision as build vs buy AI, you're forcing yourself into a corner. You end up either building everything and burning quarters on plumbing, or buying everything and sacrificing differentiation.

Speed to market matters more than ever. While you're debating, your competitors are shipping. Users have seen enough AI demos to know what good looks like. They want real value now, not promises about what you'll deliver in six months.

The broader AI infrastructure market reflects this urgency, with global AI spending projected to reach $2.5 trillion in 2026. Companies are investing heavily, but success depends on strategic choices about where to build versus where to leverage existing platforms.

CTOs who succeed don't choose between building or buying. They recognize that some layers should be built, others bought, and they know which is which.

‍

What most teams get wrong about building AI infrastructure

Let's talk about what actually happens when teams decide to build their AI infrastructure from scratch.

So you start building. Your team tackles the foundation model integration first. Then you need a memory system. Then authentication and role-based access control. Then you realize users expect the interface to work across multiple surfaces, not just your web app, but Slack, Teams, and mobile apps. The list grows longer.

Nine months later, you have something that works in staging. You test it against production data and discover the hard truth: Your custom-built system can't handle the edge cases your users throw at it. The accuracy isn't where it needs to be.

The numbers tell a sobering story. Only 31% of AI use cases have entered full production by 2026, according to the State of Enterprise AI Adoption Report.

Building AI infrastructure means committing to indefinite maintenance. Unlike traditional software where maintenance might consume 20% to 30% of resources, AI systems require continuous updates as models evolve, best practices change, and security requirements shift.

And the hidden costs add up fast. You need specialized talent that understands the technical details and how to handle infrastructure at scale. 46% of tech leaders cite AI skill gaps as a major obstacle to implementation. Each piece requires expertise and ongoing attention.

‍

The right question: what to build vs what to build on

Instead of asking whether to build or buy AI infrastructure, CTOs ask: What creates competitive advantage for our business, and what's just good infrastructure?

This reframe changes how you allocate resources. You stop burning engineering time on commodity features everyone needs. You start investing in the capabilities that make your product unique and valuable to customers.

Look at it through this lens: Nobody builds e-commerce infrastructure from scratch. They use Shopify and then build the entire storefront, brand experience, and customer journey on top of it. The infrastructure just works. Your differentiation is what you create with it.

The agentic frontend is the same. Conversational interfaces, widgets, multi-surface deployment, memory compliance infrastructure - this is the Shopify of AI. It's not where your differentiation lives. It's the foundation that needs to work flawlessly so you can focus on what actually matters: the AI capabilities that make your product unique.

The strategic filter comes down to one question: Does this capability directly create value for your customers? If yes, build it. If no, buy it.

According to Flexera research, 87% of organizations have adopted hybrid cloud strategies that combine platform infrastructure with custom development. They buy platforms that provide foundational infrastructure, then build their unique workflows and experiences on top. This isn't settling for less control. It's choosing where to apply control for maximum impact.

Matt Lyteson, CIO of technology transformation at IBM, applies this exact filter. He asks: Does this involve our unique systems and processes? If yes, they build. If it's generic infrastructure that every company needs, they buy.

‍

Building on platforms: the hybrid approach that actually works

The most successful AI implementations in 2025 aren't purely built or purely bought. They're assembled from the right mix of both.

Understanding why requires seeing what's fundamentally changed. Users interact with Claude, ChatGPT, and Perplexity daily. That expectation now transfers to every product. Users expect to talk to software, and they expect agents to take action, not just answer questions.

The frontend layer went from static and planned to dynamic and everywhere.

The old world was predictable: Build UI flows once. Ship them. Maintain annually. You knew exactly what screens users would see, in what order, on which devices. Engineering teams planned everything in advance. Manageable. Controlled.

The new world is fundamentally different: Interfaces must appear on-demand when agents need them, work across every channel users are on, and adapt instantly to what users ask for. You can't predict what you'll need, when, or where.

This breaks the traditional build approach entirely. The static model was straightforward: build all components, deploy them to specific sections, and maintain them quarterly. The dynamic reality is far more complex. Components appear contextually when agents invoke actions. They work across all surfaces. They adapt to dozens of different requests and handle edge cases you didn't anticipate. Every service you expose multiplies this complexity, and engineering capacity fragments across unpredictable demands instead of concentrating on intelligence and unique systems.

Here's what actually creates competitive advantage: Not the frontend infrastructure, every company needs the same dynamic, multi-channel, adaptive interfaces. What matters is the intelligence in your data warehouse that competitors don't have, the domain logic specific to your business, the proprietary systems only you control. But these only create advantage if agents can access them everywhere users are.

The trap is insidious. Engineering capacity pours into building dynamic frontend infrastructure that creates zero competitive differentiation because every company building agents needs it identically. Meanwhile, unique competitive assets stay unexposed because capacity is fragmented.

The hybrid approach solves this. It skips months of work building authentication, multi-tenancy, and observability from scratch. Your team focuses entirely on the layers that differentiate your product (domain logic, specialized systems, unique data intelligence).

The data backs this up. Enterprise AI investment averaged $6.5 million per organization in 2025, with 87% of large enterprises implementing AI solutions. Organizations report 34% operational efficiency gains and 27% cost reduction within 18 months.

The right platform gives you flexibility without lock-in. You customize what differentiates your product while using proven infrastructure for everything else. Your developers control the code that matters, while your product managers ship features in days, not months.

‍

‍

Moving from decision paralysis to shipping AI features users love

The build vs buy question often leads to analysis paralysis. Teams spend months debating options while the market moves forward without them.

The teams that win don't wait for perfect answers. They get something in front of users within weeks or months, not quarters. They buy infrastructure, build their unique workflows on top of it, and start learning from real-world usage. Breaking the standstill matters more than the perfect architecture.

When you ship, focus on solving real problems. Don't build AI for the sake of having AI. Find the workflows where AI eliminates friction, saves time, or unlocks capabilities that weren't possible before. Then instrument everything from day one. Set up feedback loops so you know what's working. Talk to users. Use that information to improve rapidly.

The data shows why this matters. 47% of AI deals convert to production, compared to 25% for traditional SaaS. This elevated conversion reflects strong buyer commitment and clear immediate value. When organizations commit to AI, they move fast (if the solution is ready).

‍

The real cost of getting this wrong

Getting the build vs buy decision wrong costs more than time and money. It costs market position. 

While you're building infrastructure, your competitors are learning from users and shipping their third iteration of AI features based on real feedback. While you're debugging your custom authentication system, they're already discovering what actually works.

While you're building infrastructure, your competitors are learning from users and shipping their third iteration of AI features. While you're debugging your custom authentication system, they're discovering what actually works.

Companies that spend 18 months building from scratch often discover a painful truth: their carefully constructed system doesn't match what users actually need. The market has moved. User expectations have evolved. The architecture that seemed perfect in month one looks outdated by month eighteen.

The opportunity cost compounds quickly. Every engineer working on infrastructure isn't working on features that create customer value. Every quarter spent on plumbing is a quarter not spent understanding your users, refining your product, or capturing market share.

The teams that succeed treat AI infrastructure decisions as strategic choices about where to create value, not emotional reactions to vendor relationships. They recognize that some dependencies are worth accepting if they let you focus on what actually differentiates your business.

Mindset AI provides the agentic frontend platform that lets your team focus on building competitive advantage, not commodity infrastructure.

‍