Artificial intelligence is changing procurement faster than almost any other function. CPOs are under pressure to deliver more savings, handle more suppliers, and drive more efficiency — often with leaner teams than ever before. AI negotiation technology has emerged as a powerful solution, allowing companies to automate routine bargaining and unlock value that humans don’t have time to chase.
But there’s a critical question for every procurement leader: should you build your own AI negotiation tool in-house, or buy a proven solution from a provider? This article will explore the pros and cons of the 'build vs buy' dilemma.
The idea of developing your own AI negotiation agent is clearly appealing. Building in-house gives you full control over the design, functionality, and roadmap. You can tailor the solution specifically to your processes, categories, and supplier relationships, ensuring the technology reflects exactly how your team wants to work. For some organizations, especially those in highly specialized industries, this degree of customization can feel like a real competitive advantage.
A homegrown solution also offers the promise of differentiation. If you can create a tool that no competitor has, it could become part of your organization’s strategic edge. For example, in industries where negotiation patterns are very specific, a custom-built AI could potentially capture nuances that off-the-shelf tools may not.
The reality is that building is expensive — not just upfront, but on an ongoing basis. Developing AI models, training them with sufficient data, and ensuring they behave ethically and effectively in negotiations requires significant investment in time, money, and specialized talent.
Most procurement functions simply don’t have large data science and machine learning teams sitting idle, ready to take on a multi-year project. Even if you do, those resources may be better used in areas closer to your core business.
There’s also the matter of maintenance. AI technology evolves rapidly, and keeping a homegrown solution competitive demands constant updates, retraining of models, and integrations with other systems. Falling behind the innovation curve could mean your “cutting-edge” tool is obsolete within a few years. The risk of investing heavily only to end up with an outdated or underutilized system is real — and should not be underestimated.
If you have the resources and time to devote to doing it right, building your own tool offers a huge degree of control and customization. If you don't, it's time to look at buying...
On the other side of the equation, buying an AI negotiation solution offers a very different value proposition. The biggest benefit is speed. Instead of a multi-year development journey, companies can typically deploy an AI negotiation platform within weeks, often starting with a limited pilot that quickly demonstrates value. That means cost savings and efficiency improvements show up on the balance sheet much sooner.
Buying is also generally far more cost-effective. The upfront investment is a fraction of what it would take to build, and ongoing costs are shared across the provider’s entire customer base. In effect, you’re benefiting from economies of scale. Providers like Nibble dedicate their full attention to advancing AI negotiation technology, which means customers benefit from continuous innovation and best practices without shouldering the R&D burden themselves.
Scalability is another advantage. Established providers have already tested their platforms across thousands of negotiations, ironing out the edge cases and ensuring reliability. That gives procurement teams confidence that the system can handle everything from small tail spend contracts to more complex mid-tier agreements. Nibble itself has already handled almost 2 million automated negotiations globally.
The trade-off is that buying means accepting some limitations on customization. An off-the-shelf solution may not perfectly reflect every nuance of your processes, though leading providers typically offer significant configuration options. There’s also vendor dependency to consider: once you commit to a platform, you rely on that provider for updates, integration support, and pricing. Some teams also face cultural resistance, with stakeholders wary of “outsourcing” negotiations to a machine that isn’t fully their own.
The right path depends heavily on your organization’s context. Large, resource-rich enterprises with deep data science capabilities might explore building if they believe AI negotiation can become a unique competitive differentiator. For most companies, especially those looking for near-term impact, buying will deliver faster, more reliable results.
You should weigh factors such as the size and maturity of your procurement team, your IT and AI expertise, budget constraints, and your appetite for long-term maintenance risk. Consider, too, the strategic importance of procurement technology in your business model. If procurement innovation is a pillar of your competitive advantage, building could make sense. If it’s a critical enabler but not your company’s core business, buying is almost always the smarter path.
There’s no one-size-fits-all answer to the build versus buy dilemma. Building an AI negotiation solution offers complete control and potential differentiation but demands heavy investment, scarce talent, and ongoing commitment. Buying provides speed, cost-efficiency, and access to proven, continuously updated technology, at the expense of some customization and autonomy.
AI negotiation is no longer a futuristic concept — it’s a practical tool reshaping procurement today. The question isn’t whether to adopt it, but how. And in answering that, the build vs. buy decision will set the course for how your organization captures the next wave of procurement value.
Find out more from Nibble's experience negotiating 100,000 times a month here.
Interested in Nibble?