Stay Close to Out-of-the-Box: Why Configuration Beats Customisation in System Implementations

Do we configure or customise?

At first glance, customisation might seem like the right answer. After all, your team has unique needs. You have specific reporting requirements, a particular approval workflow, or a tried-and-true way of engaging with your community.

But here’s the truth that many not-for-profits learn too late: customisation is almost never worth it.

Are You Really That Unique?

It’s tempting to think your processes are so unique that only custom development can accommodate them. But in reality, most organisations are more alike than different. What feels like uniqueness is often just habit—processes that have evolved around people, paperwork, or legacy systems.

So before reaching for that custom spec sheet, pause and ask:

Are we really that special? Or are we just attached to how we've always done it?

Why Configuration Is the Smart Choice

1. Lower Cost—Now and Later

Customisation might feel exciting, but it’s expensive. You’ll pay more upfront for developers and even more over time in support and rework. You also risk becoming locked into a single vendor who understands (and sometimes owns) your custom code.

2. Faster Deployment

Staying close to out-of-the-box allows you to implement faster and realise value sooner. You don’t need to wait months for a tailored build or endless test cycles.

3. Less Risk, More Stability

Every piece of custom code introduces potential bugs, points of failure, and complexity. Configuration stays within the boundaries of what the system was designed to do—making it more stable and predictable.

4. Future-Proofing and Easier Upgrades

When you stick with standard configuration, you make it easier to take advantage of future product updates. Custom builds often break when the core platform changes.

5. Greater Vendor and Talent Pool

Out-of-the-box systems often have large user communities and vendor ecosystems. That means more people who understand your system, more resources, and better support options. It also makes recruiting talent easier.

6. Closer to Industry Best Practice

Vendors don’t build features for one organisation—they build them based on input from many. Out-of-the-box functions often reflect widely accepted best practices. Adopting them can actually help you improve how you work.

Two Paths: Configuration vs Customisation

Let’s imagine two similar organisations—Org A and Org B—each about to implement the same system.

Org A – The Customisation Path

• Gathers detailed specs from each team.

• Hires developers to build bespoke features.

• Spends 6–12 months in development and testing.

• Experiences multiple delays due to bugs and complexity.

• Goes live a year later with a system only a few people fully understand.

• Finds future upgrades break key features.

• Stuck with one expensive vendor for ongoing support.

• Staff get frustrated and slowly return to spreadsheets.

  
  

Org B – The Configuration Path

• Challenges teams to simplify and adapt to the system's native features.

• Uses out-of-the-box workflows and reports wherever possible.

• Launches in 3–6 months.

• Provides training on new processes aligned to industry standards.

• Upgrades easily with no breakage.

• Benefits from community forums, vendor support, and internal capability.

• Team feels empowered and system adoption is high.

  
  

In Summary

Choosing configuration over customisation isn’t just a technical decision—it’s a cultural one. It’s about being open to change, letting go of legacy habits, and embracing continuous improvement.

So, the next time someone says, “We need this to work exactly how we do it now,” gently ask them:

Do we really? Or is this an opportunity to evolve?

Because in the long run, staying close to out-of-the-box isn’t about settling. It’s about setting your organisation up for success—sustainably, affordably, and confidently.