Choosing a traceability solution: SaaS, bespoke or spreadsheet — the criteria

Our guide on the criteria for choosing traceability software covers what to ask before signing. This one focuses on a different question: how to compare the real cost of the three main families of solutions — spreadsheet, SaaS, bespoke development — beyond the price displayed at first glance.

The spreadsheet: zero entry cost, growing hidden cost

A shared spreadsheet costs nothing to set up, but its real cost grows with volume: time spent entering data, correcting synchronisation errors between versions, reconstructing a search by hand. This cost is diffuse — nobody sees it on an invoice — but it becomes significant as soon as volume exceeds what one or two people can handle without error.

SaaS: a recurring cost, predictable but cumulative

A SaaS solution shows a clear monthly or annual subscription, but the total cost over several years often exceeds the initial estimate:

• Set-up fees — configuration, import of existing data, often billed separately from the subscription.
• Cost per user or per volume — a price that seems reasonable at small scale can grow significantly with activity.
• Connectors to existing tools (ERP, till) — often a paid option separate from the basic package.
• Cumulative cost over 3 years — a subscription at €100/month amounts to €3,600 over three years, to be compared seriously with the investment in bespoke development.

Bespoke development: high initial investment, low marginal cost thereafter

Bespoke development requires a markedly higher upfront investment (design, development, testing) but can become more economical than SaaS beyond a certain horizon, since it does not accumulate a recurring subscription — at the price, in return, of maintenance that remains the responsibility of the business or its contractor.

When bespoke development makes sense

• Sufficient volume for the cumulative cost of a SaaS tool over 3 to 5 years to significantly exceed the bespoke investment.
• A genuinely specific process, poorly covered by the generic solutions on the market — not just an aesthetic preference or a wish for superfluous customisation.
• In-house capability or a trusted contractor to handle maintenance over time, without which the initial investment quickly loses its value.

Unless all these conditions are met, a SaaS solution generally remains the most rational choice: the cost of developing and maintaining a bespoke tool is frequently underestimated relative to the subscription it is meant to replace.

How to compare, in practice

1. Estimate the cost of the current spreadsheet in staff time, converted into monetary value, rather than simply saying “it's free”.
2. Ask each SaaS vendor for the total cost over 3 years, all fees included (set-up, connectors, additional users).
3. Have bespoke development costed by at least two contractors, with an explicit annual maintenance cost.
4. Compare the three totals over the same period, not just the entry cost.

Common mistakes

• Comparing a monthly subscription with a total development cost without bringing both to the same period.
• Underestimating the maintenance of a bespoke tool, which does not stop at initial delivery.
• Choosing a SaaS tool for its advanced features that are never actually used, paying a price calibrated for broader use than your own.

Checklist

1. Cost the real price of the current system, spreadsheet included.
2. Ask for a total cost over 3 years from every SaaS solution under consideration.
3. Only consider bespoke development beyond a truly significant volume or specificity of process.
4. Check the maintenance capacity available before any bespoke investment.