Adopting GenAI for ITSM: Should You Build or Buy?

Modern IT Service Management (ITSM) demands more than a keen understanding of technology; it requires a strategic roadmap that leverages innovative technologies, such as Generative AI (GenAI). The question isn't if GenAI will disrupt ITSM—it's a matter of how and when. At this stage, enterprises must decide between building their GenAI solutions from scratch or partnering with established platforms like Rezolve.ai. 

We asked an industry expert in GenAI IT Service Desks to help us understand the impact of this pivot in enterprise ITSM strategy and guide us on the way forward for companies.

This is a Q&A with Kathy Williams, a Service Desk Specialist. Kathy has worked with many customers from different business verticals to implement GenAI across their enterprises for streamlining ITSM. 

Read on!

1) Question-
Let's start by addressing a fundamental decision many IT leaders face today: the choice between building their own GenAI ITSM solution or buying a pre-existing one. What are the key considerations they should keep in mind?

Answer-
The decision between building and buying a GenAI IT Service Desk hinges on several critical factors. Total Cost of Ownership is paramount. It's not just about the upfront costs; ongoing maintenance, upgrades and hidden costs due to unforeseen technical challenges are significant. For instance, Mark Lutchen from PricewaterhouseCoopers highlighted that about 70% of software costs are incurred post-implementation.

1. ‍The Product Development Process also plays a crucial role. The Standish Group's Chaos Report shows that only 29% of IT projects are successful. The iterative process of developing, testing and refining is slow and fraught with risks, especially when relying on limited internal feedback.‍
2. When considering Product Features, it's startling to note from Feature Driven Development (FDD) research that 64% of software features are rarely or never used. This statistic underscores the importance of focusing on features that meet actual user needs, which building in-house might only sometimes align with due to limited capabilities and the risk of rapid obsolescence.‍
3. For a Service Desk Focused Solution, the lack of domain expertise in building one can lead to solutions that only partially meet user and business needs. Research by HDI shows specialized IT service desk solutions can improve first contact resolution rates by up to 75%.‍
4. The challenge is even more pronounced considering Enterprise Size, especially for mid-market companies. Forrester Research finds that 60% of mid-market enterprises cite flexibility and scalability as their top IT priorities, which might be hard to achieve with an in-house solution.‍
5. Core Competency is another crucial consideration. A McKinsey study revealed that companies focusing on their core competencies could achieve up to three times higher return on investment than those investing in non-core areas.‍
6. Historical Precedence also leans in favor of buying. Analysis of IT projects over the past decade shows a 50% higher success rate for projects leveraging existing solutions versus those built from scratch.
7. Lastly, Time to Market is critical in today's fast-paced environment. Building an in-house solution can significantly delay the deployment of new services, causing missed opportunities and a risk of being outpaced by competitors.

2) Question-
Since building an in-house GenAI ITSM solution comes with high costs and risks, can you elaborate on the specific challenges of ongoing maintenance and upgrades?

Answer-
Certainly. The Ongoing Maintenance Costs of building a GenAI ITSM solution are often underestimated. After the initial setup, the system requires continuous investment in keeping it running and upgrading to keep pace with technological advancements and evolving business needs. This scenario often leads to a significant allocation of resources to non-core activities, which can detract from focusing on the business's main value drivers.

The challenges of Knowledge Transfer are also to be noticed. Dependency on a small group of internal resources for the development and maintenance of the system means that any turnover in staff can lead to gaps in knowledge and capability. This scenario is further complicated by the Limited Feedback Loop inherent in developing in-house solutions, where the product's improvement is based on a narrow set of insights, missing out on the diverse perspectives a market-driven product like Rezolve.ai benefits from.

3) Question-
Considering the rapid pace of technological change, how significant is the risk of obsolescence for companies that choose to build their own GenAI ITSM solutions?

Answer-
The Risk of Obsolescence is a critical concern. The tech landscape, especially around GenAI, is evolving at an unprecedented rate. Companies building in-house solutions risk finding outdated systems almost as soon as they are deployed. This issue isn't just about staying current with technological trends; it's about integrating with other evolving systems and maintaining security standards. For instance, our research and development at Rezolve.ai since January 2023 have shown the importance of continuously integrating new models and features to stay ahead. This continuous improvement is something that can be challenging to sustain with an in-house solution.

4) Question-
How does the decision between building and buying impact mid-market enterprises' ability to efficiently scale and meet their IT needs?

Answer-
For mid-market enterprises, the impact of this decision is profound. These companies often operate with more limited resources compared to larger organizations, making the efficiency of resource allocation crucial. When they Build, the scope of what they can achieve is inherently limited by these resource and expertise constraints. This limitation affects their innovation ability and poses Scalability Challenges as the business grows. As highlighted by Forrester Research, 60% of mid-market enterprises emphasize the need for flexibility and scalability as their top IT priorities, which can be severely hampered by the resource-intensive nature of building an in-house solution.

Conversely, opting to Buy from a provider like Rezolve.ai means accessing scalable solutions that can adapt to the business's evolving needs without significant upfront investment in resources or expertise. This approach allows mid-market companies to leverage advanced tools and technologies, offering them the Affordability and Efficiency needed to focus on core business activities and growth.

5) Question-
Reflecting on the broader industry perspective, how does focusing on core competencies influence the build vs. buy decision for companies looking to integrate GenAI into their ITSM?

Answer-
Focusing on core competencies significantly influences this decision, largely due to the strategic allocation of resources and the pursuit of operational excellence. According to a McKinsey study, companies that concentrate their efforts on what they do best can achieve returns on investment up to three times higher than those diluting their focus across non-core activities. When companies decide to Build their GenAI ITSM solutions, they often divert precious resources away from their primary value propositions, leading to a Misplaced Focus. This diversion can dilute their competitive edge and lead to a Risk of Mediocrity, where they become average in many areas rather than excelling in their key markets.

On the other hand, choosing to Buy allows companies to leverage the expertise of specialized service providers like Rezolve.ai, ensuring they benefit from the latest advancements in GenAI without straying from their core competencies. This strategic choice not only enables them to maintain a sharp focus on their main business drivers but also offers a Strategic Advantage by employing cutting-edge technology to enhance their operations without the overheads associated with building and maintaining an in-house solution.

6) Question-
Historically, what lessons can companies learn from others' experiences when choosing between building a bespoke solution and opting for a market-ready product like Rezolve.ai?

Answer-
Historical precedence offers valuable lessons for companies facing this decision today. The analysis of IT projects over the past decade reveals that those leveraging existing market-ready solutions have a significantly higher success rate—up to 50% higher—than bespoke builds. This difference is attributed to the Efficient Resource Use and the ability to avoid the pitfalls that others have encountered. Many enterprises have faced Failed Implementations and resource-intensive projects that failed to meet their objectives or provide a viable solution within a reasonable timeframe.

Choosing a market-ready product like Rezolve.ai means benefiting from Proven Success and the service provider's experience in navigating the challenges of ITSM solutions. Companies can avoid the Lessons from the Past, where in-house projects often exceeded budgets and timelines and failed to meet the evolving needs of the business. Opting for a proven solution allows companies to leapfrog the learning curve and avoid the costly mistakes made by others in pursuing innovation.

Integrating GenAI into ITSM is a strategic imperative for companies aiming to enhance their IT support services. The decision between building an in-house solution or opting for a ready-made platform like Rezolve.ai should be guided by considerations of total cost of ownership, product development process, feature relevance, domain expertise, scalability, focus on core competencies, historical success rates and time to market. 

As our expert outlined, the advantages of buying a market-ready solution often outweigh the challenges of building an in-house system, especially for mid-market companies seeking to leverage the latest technological advancements without diverting focus from their core business activities.