Run the Insourcing Readiness Score
- 01
Spend materiality
Software, cloud, and outsourced development spend has become a board-visible line item.
For most mid-market companies that threshold arrives around 1-2% of revenue - or the first renewal that triples.
- 02
Spend materiality
That spend is growing faster than revenue.
Per-seat pricing plus headcount growth plus annual uplifts compounds quietly until it doesn't.
- 03
Renewal pressure
At least one renewal in the past year arrived with a significant price increase.
Uplifts, forced tier migrations, and AI add-ons priced into the base all count.
- 04
Renewal pressure
Renewal dates and auto-renew notice windows are not tracked in one place anyone owns.
If the first warning of a renewal is the invoice, negotiation leverage is already gone.
- 05
Sprawl and waste
Nobody has audited seats and usage against what is actually paid for in the past year.
Unused licenses and ghost assignments routinely survive years of renewals unexamined.
- 06
Sprawl and waste
Multiple tools in the stack do substantially the same job.
Overlap accumulates through departmental buying, acquisitions, and pilots that never ended.
- 07
Internal ownership capacity
A specific person could own an internal system full-time or near it - not as a side project.
Systems without named owners become the insourcing failure stories. Spare capacity is not ownership.
- 08
Internal ownership capacity
The company employs engineers who ship to production today.
Ownership without an engineering bench means every build decision is also a hiring decision.
- 09
Workload stability
The workflows behind your biggest software costs are stable and well understood.
Ownership rewards stable, boring workloads. Domains still changing quarterly should stay on subscriptions.
- 10
Workload stability
For at least one expensive tool, the team can describe what it actually needs in a page.
"A form and three reports" priced at enterprise-platform rates is the classic ownership candidate.
- 11
Vendor dependency
Something important to the business moves at a vendor's pace, not yours.
Stagnant platforms, unresponsive providers, and roadmaps that ignore you are dependency costs.
- 12
Vendor dependency
Leaving a key vendor would be hard because of data, integrations, or contract terms.
Lock-in is a data-control problem before it is a cost problem - and it compounds with every renewal.
Current score
0/100 · Subscribe and manage
Spend pressure is modest and ownership capacity is thin. The right moves are visibility and hygiene: build the renewal calendar, audit seats once, and revisit when a renewal or a build proposal forces a real decision. Taking ownership of systems from this position usually creates more risk than it removes.
Answer every question to use this as the final result.
Strongest signals
- Spend materiality0/100
Whether software and cloud costs are large enough for ownership decisions to matter.
- Renewal pressure0/100
Uplifts, repricing, forced bundles, and auto-renew terms arriving faster than anyone can respond.
- Sprawl and waste0/100
Unused seats, overlapping tools, and subscriptions nobody can defend in a budget review.
Weakest dimensions
- Spend materiality0/100
Whether software and cloud costs are large enough for ownership decisions to matter.
- Renewal pressure0/100
Uplifts, repricing, forced bundles, and auto-renew terms arriving faster than anyone can respond.
Recommended next step
Start with the renewal decision guide
Your stack is not the problem yet - your visibility might be.