Business System Consultation Center - Our Business System ColumnVol.163 2025.05.01 Takahashi Minoru

Do you really need ESU?

Thank you for your interest and continued support.
This is Takahashi from the Marketing Plan Research Laboratory.


In recent years, I have been receiving an increasing number of inquiries from clients regarding the merits and demerits of development platforms that utilize no-code and low-code tools.
and the merits and demerits of development platforms that utilize them.
My answer is usually that I do not recommend them.


Even just looking at the domestic market,
there are many no-code and low-code system development tools on the market.
Their main selling points are all the same—to put it simply,
“Even complete beginners can easily build systems, and updates are simple,” but
to be honest, for us small and medium-sized enterprises, this claim is nothing but a "scam."


Of course, compared to working directly with various programming languages to build databases and the like,
no-code tools are, as you say, “easy.”
However, this “ease” is limited to the scope of functions the tool provides—and within that scope, it is indeed a fact and the truth.
Precisely because there is no lie in this regard, there is no end to users who fail to recognize the "deception,"
and the number of companies that suffer after purchasing these tools is likely to increase in the future.


While ease of use is an important factor, it is not the primary objective.
The most important factor in selecting a system is not “whether it is easy,”
but “whether it can support your company’s unique business operations.”
No matter how easy it is to build, a system that doesn’t fit your needs will be of no use to anyone.


Furthermore, requirements that fall even slightly outside a tool’s functional scope
will cause the implementation difficulty to skyrocket in most products.
Regarding the “ease of use” touted by no-code platforms,
it is entirely possible that this claim is false depending on the requirements.
There’s an asterisk (*) in the corner of the brochure, so be sure to read it carefully.


When implementing business processes unique to your company,
the person responsible for building the system must possess the following knowledge and skills:
① Understanding the company’s business rules and accumulated know-how
② The ability to break these down into components and translate them into algorithms (system fields, conditional branching)
Points ① and ② are essential regardless of whether low-code tools are used.
Unless you are a large corporation with an in-house team of systems engineers,
building and maintaining a high-quality system will likely be an extremely difficult task.


Furthermore, if you are planning for long-term operation, the following factors should also be included in your selection criteria:
1. Estimated total cost over 10 to 20 years
2. Whether the system can be transferred to other companies’ systems or vendors


Point 1 above is not particularly difficult, as calculations and cost comparisons can be done freely.
If I had to point out a drawback,
“the cost of low-code tools may be directly proportional to the number of users,”
you should be able to obtain accurate information by requesting quotes.


Point 2 above is precisely the pitfall of low-code tools.
If circumstances change in the future and you decide to switch to a different tool or vendor,
it is virtually impossible to “easily” migrate to another vendor with almost all tools.
While many tools offer features for reusing or importing historical data,
transferring the system’s algorithms is virtually impossible,
requiring you to rebuild the system from scratch at the new provider.


To summarize the above, we often respond that we “do not recommend” this approach based on the following reasoning:
・Whether it is "easy" depends on the skills of your employees
・We cannot accommodate overly unique company cultures,
so it is only after signing the contract that we can determine whether the system will be successful
・Transferring the system to another company in the future is not "easy"
Switching providers would require a complete rebuild, incurring additional development costs


If you can accept both the pros and cons mentioned above,
low-code tools are certainly worth considering,
I feel that this is not “easy” for small and micro-sized businesses.


That's all, Thank you for reading.

------------------------------

■ Previous / Next Column ■

＜＜＜ Next Column Vol.164 - Maintenance contracts are for binding the system company, not your company 2025.06.01

＞＞＞ Previous Column Vol.162 - The no-code sales pitch 'build systems easily' is a bait-and-switch argument 2025.04.01

Back to Column List