Custom software development is often associated with substantial costs. However, contrary to widespread assumptions, a significant proportion of these expenses arise not during programming itself, but far earlier—at the stage of architectural design. It is here that the foundations are laid for flexibility, scalability, maintainability, and, ultimately, the total cost of ownership (TCO) throughout the system’s entire lifecycle.
When properly designed, architecture enables businesses to optimise software development costs by:
- minimising duplication of code and functionality;
- reducing the cost impact of changing requirements;
- accelerating the delivery of new features;
- lowering the long-term cost of testing and maintenance;
- ensuring stability and manageability as the platform scales.
A Common Mistake That Drives Up Development Costs
At the start of most projects, both clients and development teams typically focus heavily on business functionality: which screens are required, which data fields need to be displayed, and which processing logic should be implemented. Unfortunately, discussions around architecture—particularly component unification and long-term maintainability—are often overlooked or postponed.
As a result, developers frequently deliver functionality on a sprint-by-sprint basis, creating isolated forms, modules or lists for each scenario. While this approach aligns with Agile’s emphasis on producing “working software now,” it tends to generate substantial technical debt as early as the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) stage.
Without a deliberate, centralised architectural plan, even highly skilled teams end up duplicating work across multiple parts of the system. Each version may contain separate validation rules, layouts, error handling mechanisms, and API communication logic. This phenomenon, known as implicit duplication, quickly escalates both ongoing maintenance costs and the likelihood of defects—ultimately undermining efforts to optimise software development costs.
The Client’s Critical Role in Architectural Planning
Not all software vendors—regardless of their technical competence—will automatically propose an architecture focused on reusable components, particularly when the client’s short-term goal is rapid MVP delivery. Therefore, it is essential that clients take an active role in defining architectural expectations from the outset.
By prioritising reusable, framework-agnostic components at the design stage, clients enable long-term cost efficiencies that multiply as the project evolves. This is precisely where Software Planet Group distinguishes itself by actively guiding clients to optimise software development costs through deliberate architectural planning.
Where Architecture Can Deliver Immediate Cost Optimisation
In practical terms, approximately 70–80 per cent of web application user interfaces rely on two primary structures:
1. Data Forms
These are essential for creating, editing, and viewing entities such as:
- user profiles,
- product records,
- orders,
- service requests,
- employee details.
2. Data Lists
These handle the display of multiple entities through:
- tables and registries,
- card views,
- search, filtering, sorting, and grouping features.
Such elements serve as the backbone for a wide range of systems, including:
- CRM and ERP platforms;
- administrative dashboards;
- e-commerce websites;
- accounting and financial software;
- analytical and business intelligence dashboards.
Although modern front-end frameworks like Angular, React, and Vue offer robust development tools, they primarily address low-level technical concerns—such as data binding, rendering, event handling, and basic validation. They do not inherently provide business-focused abstractions that support long-term maintainability and cost optimisation.
The Hidden Cost of Duplication
Without building an abstraction layer over these frameworks, developers inevitably create multiple isolated versions of forms and lists:
- each with different data mappings;
- varying validation logic;
- inconsistent error messaging;
- fragmented API integration;
- and inconsistent user experiences.
Over time, this leads to a fragmented codebase filled with near-identical components that become increasingly expensive to test, update and maintain. These inefficiencies directly undermine any effort to optimise software development costs.
Software Planet Group’s Architectural Solution: Declarative, Framework-Agnostic Components
At Software Planet Group, we address this challenge by guiding clients to adopt a strategy of architectural unification. Through the creation of internal component libraries, we enable organisations to build scalable, maintainable systems that significantly optimise software development costs over the long term.
Universal Form Components
- Declarative Form Descriptions: Forms are defined via configuration files that specify fields, field types, input masks, validation rules, and error messages.
- Central Rendering Engine: A single rendering engine constructs every form based on this configuration, ensuring consistent design, business logic and user experience.
- Centralised Validation: Validation logic is centralised and applied uniformly across all forms.
- Unified Error Output: Errors are displayed in a standardised, user-friendly format.
- Flexible Extensions: New field types or validation rules can be added centrally, without rewriting or duplicating code.
Universal List Components
- Declarative Column Configuration: Lists are defined by specifying column names, data formats, and rules for sorting, filtering, and pagination.
- Unified Display Component: A standardised list engine supports mass selection, data export, inline editing, and dynamic API-based data loading.
- Consistent API Communication: Server interactions are fully standardised, reducing the complexity of backend integration.
How Clients Should Define Vendor Requirements
Clients who wish to optimise software development costs should clearly articulate architectural requirements at the beginning of any custom software project. A sample vendor specification might state:
“Develop a platform of reusable UI components. All forms must be built declaratively using a unified rendering engine. Validation logic, error display, and API interactions must follow centralised standards. Lists should similarly rely on declarative configurations for columns and API integration, requiring only configuration rather than bespoke development for each new form.”
Why Many Vendors Do Not Offer This Approach
- It requires additional effort upfront, including architectural design, engine development, and thorough testing of component generality.
- Many development teams lack experience in constructing internal framework-agnostic component libraries.
- Vendors focused on short-term MVP delivery may prioritise speed over long-term cost efficiency.
As such, leadership on this issue must usually come from the client. Here again, Software Planet Group serves as a trusted partner, helping businesses recognise and adopt architectural strategies that genuinely optimise software development costs.
The Long-Term Economic Impact of Unified Architecture
A well-architected component-based system offers compounding savings throughout the entire project lifecycle:
- Development: Faster delivery of new screens and features with reduced engineering effort.
- Testing: Smaller, more predictable testing scope with fewer defects.
- Maintenance: Centralised fixes that automatically propagate throughout the system.
- Scaling: Rapid development of new business modules as needs evolve.
- User Experience: Consistent, high-quality interfaces that improve usability and customer satisfaction.
Common Pitfalls When Implementing Unified Architecture
Excessive Universalisation
Attempting to cover every conceivable edge case at once can create overly complex, inflexible components. The optimal strategy combines generic engines with the flexibility to inject custom behaviour when necessary.
Premature Optimisation
Investing heavily in scalable frameworks too early—before clear reuse patterns emerge—can inflate budgets and add unnecessary complexity. A more pragmatic approach involves manually building several forms initially, identifying commonalities, and then gradually formalising reusable components.
Conclusion: Architecture as a Strategic Business Decision
Modular architecture is not merely a technical preference but a hallmark of mature project management. From the earliest stages, clients and developers must collaborate to define an architectural vision that reduces duplication and maximises component reuse.
By adopting this approach—championed by Software Planet Group—clients not only optimise software development costs but also create systems that are easier to maintain, faster to scale, and better equipped to adapt to changing business needs.
