Do Nothing, DIY, or Vendor: The Only Three Options

> TL;DR: When a buyer faces an urgent & important problem, there are only three choices: Do Nothing, DIY, or Vendor. Make the decision easy by putting the options on one honest table with the same spine—canary → impact → value, shared assumptions, and two time windows. Treat DIY as the practical price ceiling, and prove you're faster and lower risk without hand-waving.

Why these are the only three

A lot of noise hides inside fancy labels ("pilot program," "co-innovation," "strategic partnership"). Strip it all down and every path is one of three:

• Do Nothing: keep the status quo and continue paying the cost of the impact. It's deceptively "cheap" because there is no new line item, but it's often the most expensive in time.
• DIY: build and maintain the fix in-house. Credible only if owners, scope, timeline, and adoption are real—and if opportunity cost is priced in.
• Vendor: adopt a proven approach that gets you to the same fix

When sellers pretend there are more than three, trust drops. When buyers are shown three clean paths, momentum rises.

Frame the problem (buyer language, U&I)

Before you draw the table, write one paragraph that names the U&I problem exactly as the buyer would—using their KPI and their planning window. Tie it to a published initiative. If there is no initiative to connect to, the table becomes theater. The safest way to earn attention is to speak in the org's numbers and dates, not your adjectives.

Build one honest table with a shared spine

Your goal is a table an internal ops leader would forward without editing. Use the same columns for each row:

1) Inputs: the canary, its baseline, and the measurement window.

2) Time: development (for DIY) vs. implementation (for Vendor).

3) Change: who must do what and when (adoption work).

4) Risk: the confidence factor both sides agree on.

5) Math: Benefit = Impact × Risk; for DIY and Vendor: Net = Benefit − Cost.

Keep units visible. If you're counting hours, say hours. If you're counting revenue, say dollars. The second someone has to convert, you've lost the room.

Row 1 — Do Nothing

Definition: stay the course.

Reality: the org keeps paying the ongoing impact.

Math: compute the impact over two windows: a near-term credibility window (roughly first 1–2 quarters after a plausible go-live) and a longer window (12–18 months). This is the price of inertia. Put it on paper so everyone sees what "free" costs.

Why it matters: owning the Do Nothing row signals you're not manufacturing urgency; you're quantifying it. It also gives Finance a baseline to compare with the other rows.

Row 2 — DIY

Definition: the org builds the same fix internally.

Time: include development lead time before the canary can move; then add the adoption timeline.

Change: list the internal work—design, build, QA, data, enablement, ongoing support. Adoption lands on the org; that must be visible.

Cost: build + maintenance + support + opportunity cost (what won't get done while this is happening).

Math: Net = (Impact × Risk) − Cost across both windows.

Why it matters: DIY is the practical price ceiling. If your Vendor row cannot look better than a credible DIY—on time-to-value or on risk—you're not selling; you're hoping. Treat DIY with respect; beating a credible plan is how you earn trust.

Row 3 — Vendor

Definition: adopt a proven approach to reach the same fix.

Time: show the shorter implementation lead time to canary movement.

Change: adoption is still real; show how you share the work and how your plan reduces risk of shelfware.

Cost: subscription + services; be explicit about what's in scope.

Math: Net = (Impact × Risk) − Cost in both windows, using the same impact definition you used above.

Why it matters: you are not selling magic. You're selling speed and certainty. If you cannot claim those credibly, the Vendor row collapses into "higher cost with a nicer interface."

Show your work (twice)

Put the canary → impact → value paragraph right under the table:

• Canary: the leading indicator you can move in the chosen window.
• Impact: how that movement rolls up to the business result the org already tracks.
• Benefit = Impact × Risk: the risk factor is your shared confidence level, not your wish.
• Two windows:

If your math only "works" at 18 months, you don't have a case—you have a promise.

Implementation & change (apples to apples)

An options table that pretends adoption is free for one row and expensive for another is a lie. List owners, milestones, and adoption risks with guardrails for DIY and Vendor. If you wouldn't accept vague "we'll figure it out later" from a buyer, don't ship it to them.

Common failure patterns (and the fix)

• No Do Nothing row. Fix: quantify the ongoing impact; let people see the real baseline.
• Strawman DIY. Fix: give DIY a credible plan with real time and cost; then beat it.
• Hand-wavy Vendor benefits. Fix: tie benefits to the canary and agree on risk; no magic multipliers.
• Asymmetric adoption. Fix: write the same adoption headings for both DIY and Vendor; then show where you de-risk.

What good looks like (checklist)

• A one-paragraph U&I problem statement in buyer language tied to a published objective.
• One table with three rows and the exact same columns (inputs, time, change, risk, math).
• DIY treated as a serious plan—owners, timeline, maintenance, opportunity cost.
• Vendor row that proves faster time-to-value and lower risk with the buyer's words.
• Canary → impact → value paragraph with exposed assumptions and
• A short readout that interprets the table for an executive who sees it for the first time.

CTA

Take a live opportunity and draft the three-row table with shared assumptions. Send only the table to your champion and ask, "What did I get wrong?" Iterate until they can forward it without you. That moment—when your table travels on its own—is when you know you've earned the decision.