Most teams end up evaluating two paths for enterprise chat: build your own (often meaning self-hosted or heavily customized) or buy a packaged business chat platform. The right answer depends less on ideology and more on whether you can meet your security, control, and reliability needs without creating an internal product you can’t sustainably maintain. Below is a realistic framework you can use to decide, with the trade-offs spelled out in plain language.
Start with the non-negotiables (your “decision boundaries”)
Before comparing vendors or sketching an architecture, define the few requirements that will immediately rule options in or out. In practice, the fastest way to decide whether you should own instant messenger infrastructure (or stick with a hosted service) is to list constraints that are hard to compromise on.
- Data residency and compliance: Must messages stay on-premise? Are there industry rules (finance, healthcare, public sector) that require tighter control over storage and access?
- Security model: Do you need customer-managed keys, your own encryption policies, or isolated networks? Is “secure internal communication” a board-level risk topic?
- Identity and access control: Do you need deep integration with SSO, SCIM provisioning, role-based access, and offboarding guarantees?
- Auditability and eDiscovery: Are retention policies, legal holds, and searchable logs mandatory?
- Integration requirements: Do you need the chat system to plug into ticketing, incident response, ERP/CRM, or internal tools in very specific ways?
If your decision boundaries require on-premise messaging, strict data control, or bespoke security posture, buying a standard cloud service may be disqualified early. If your boundaries are more about usability and speed, buying is often the default winner.
Clarify what “build” really means
When people say “build,” they often mean one of three realities:
- Build from scratch: You write the messaging backend, clients, and admin tooling. This is rare and usually only justified at very large scale or for unique requirements.
- Adopt a self-hosted chat stack: You run an existing platform on your infrastructure and own the operations, upgrades, and security hardening.
- Hybrid ownership: You buy a platform but require private deployment, dedicated infrastructure, or heavy customization to meet internal policies.
In other words, “own messaging platform” typically means owning the operational and security responsibility, not necessarily writing everything yourself. Getting this definition right prevents unrealistic timelines and budgets.
Use a simple scoring model (so emotion doesn’t drive the choice)
A practical way to compare building vs. buying is to score each path across a handful of categories using a 1–5 scale, then weight what matters most. Here are the categories that tend to decide the outcome for an internal messaging system:
1) Control and risk
Buying usually gives you speed but less control over roadmap, data handling, and vendor decisions. Building/self-hosting gives you maximum control but shifts risk onto your team.
- Buy wins if vendor risk is acceptable and contracts/SLA cover your needs.
- Build wins if “messaging platform ownership” is necessary to reduce external dependency and satisfy internal risk management.
2) Total cost of ownership (TCO) over 3 years
Licenses are only one piece. A realistic TCO includes people, operations, security work, and migration costs.
- Buy costs: per-user fees, add-ons, premium security features, long-term price increases.
- Build/self-host costs: infrastructure, on-call rotation, patching, backups, monitoring, incident response, and platform engineers.
A common surprise: self-hosted chat can be cheaper at scale, but only if you already have mature infrastructure operations. Otherwise, “hidden labor” dominates.
3) Time-to-value and adoption
Buying a business chat platform usually wins on onboarding, polish, and end-user familiarity. Building tends to slow initial rollout, especially if you also need mobile apps, desktop clients, and admin consoles.
If you’re switching from public apps (think “alternatives to WhatsApp” or “alternatives to Telegram”), adoption friction matters. Employees compare your internal tool to consumer-grade UX, whether that’s fair or not.
4) Reliability and support expectations
Enterprise messaging is deceptively demanding: real-time delivery, uptime expectations, and rapid incident response. Ask what happens at 2 a.m. during an outage.
- Buy can offer SLAs and 24/7 support (at a price).
- Self-host requires you to build production discipline: observability, runbooks, capacity planning, and tested backups.
5) Security posture (not just features)
Security is not only “does it support encryption.” It’s also how quickly vulnerabilities are patched, how access is audited, and whether the system fits your network model.
Buying can deliver strong security features; owning delivers strong security control—if you have the expertise to use it well.
Decision shortcuts (when the answer is usually obvious)
Some patterns show up repeatedly for companies evaluating a private messaging platform for business.
You should usually buy when…
- You need a solution in weeks, not months.
- Your requirements are standard: SSO, channels, search, basic retention, common integrations.
- You don’t have dedicated staff for operating a self-hosted chat environment.
- Adoption and UX polish are the highest priority.
You should strongly consider owning/self-hosting when…
- You require on-premise messaging or strict data residency.
- You need deeper control over retention, audit logs, and internal access models.
- Your organization treats secure internal communication as a core risk area.
- You’re uncomfortable with vendor lock-in, policy changes, or sudden pricing shifts.
The most common “middle path” that actually works
Many teams don’t need an extreme. A realistic approach is to buy for most users and reserve a more controlled internal messaging system for specific groups (security, incident response, regulated teams) or specific types of communication. Another workable middle path is self-hosting an established platform with minimal customization at first—then expanding only when the operational basics are stable.
The key is sequencing: earn reliability, then add complexity. Not the other way around.
Summary
The build-vs.-buy decision becomes clearer when you set non-negotiable boundaries, define what “build” truly means (often self-hosted ownership), and score both paths across control, TCO, time-to-value, reliability, and security posture. Buying tends to win on speed and adoption; owning your own messaging platform tends to win on control, compliance, and long-term stability—provided you can sustain the operational responsibility.
Image via Unsplash