# Build vs. Hire decision tool

> Score one open engineering role against six factors and get a recommendation: hire full-time, augment, or neither. Free, no email required.

Source page: https://mnpsystems.ca/tools/build-vs-hire/

MNP Systems is an engineering consultancy based in Brampton, Ontario, Canada, that takes work from anywhere: remotely, or on site where a job needs hands on the equipment.
Contact: https://mnpsystems.ca/contact/, contact@mnpsystems.ca, or call 1-888-338-1090 (toll-free; an AI receptionist answers).

**Hire, augment, or neither?**

Six questions about one specific open role — the one you were about to write a job description for. You get the recommendation on this page, with the reasoning.

We sell one of the two answers, so it is worth saying plainly: this framework recommends hiring for a large share of the roles it is run against, and it is built to do that. A framework that always reaches the same answer is marketing.

Build vs. Hire, walked through. One open engineering role scored on an example: six answers, the recommendation and its reasons, and how changing an answer changes it. Video walkthrough (MP4, narrated): https://mnpsystems.ca/video/tools/build-vs-hire.mp4

## How it works

Answer each of the six questions below for one open role. The first answer scores 0, the second 1 and the third 2. Add the six scores, a total from 0 to 12, and read the result from the table at the end.

## 1. Distance from Core IP

How close is this work to the capability that defines your company?

- It is the Core IP (0)
- Touches Core interfaces (1)
- Context work (2)

## 2. Duration of the need

How long will you need this capability?

- Permanent, no end date (0)
- 12–24 months (1)
- Defined scope under a year (2)

## 3. Domain specialisation

How specialised is it, relative to what your team already does?

- Your team does this weekly (0)
- Your team could learn it (1)
- A specialism you do not intend to keep (2)

## 4. Deadline

What does the schedule actually look like?

- No fixed date; 9 months is fine (0)
- A date, and it can move (1)
- A fixed external date inside 6 months (2)

## 5. Knowledge that must stay in-house

How much of the know-how has to remain with your team afterwards?

- All of it — this becomes a standing capability (0)
- Interfaces and operation (1)
- The result runs; the practice need not stay (2)

## 6. Internal supervision

Who inside your company could review and direct this work?

- Nobody could review the output (0)
- Someone can review, not direct (1)
- A named engineer can review and direct (2)

## Reading the total

| Total | Recommendation | Why |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 0–3 | Hire full-time | Core, permanent, and the capability has to live with you. |
| 4–7 | Augment with a handover clause | And a named internal owner. The work can leave the building; the knowledge cannot. |
| 8–10 | Augment | Scoped, specialised, and time-bound. |
| 11–12 | A short-term contract | Too brief and self-contained to justify either a hire or an engagement. |

## Two answers override the total

1. **0 on Distance from Core IP:** hire, whatever the other five say. The recommendation is "Hire full-time".
2. **0 on Internal supervision:** do not augment yet. Unsupervised outside work on a system nobody internal understands produces something that runs and nobody can change. If the total points anywhere but "Hire full-time", the answer is "Not yet": the conversation worth having is about what supervision would take.

The score is a prompt for a conversation, not an oracle.