You can use the following framework to assess where MDriven may reduce software delivery and maintenance effort for a planned or existing business application. Results depend on the application scope, existing systems, team, delivery process, and hosting arrangement.
Where savings may arise
MDriven describes its approach as model-driven: models represent the system and support deployment from a model-driven integrated environment. MDriven features and benefits states that MDriven automates parts of development, including database generation, UI creation, and business-logic enforcement. The Evaluation Guide also describes visual models, built-in documentation, legacy integration, reverse engineering, and cloud integrations.
| Cost area | Relevant MDriven capability | Assessment example |
|---|---|---|
| Development effort | MDriven states that it automates database generation, UI creation, and business-logic enforcement. | For a proposed application, list the database structures, views, validation rules, and workflows that would otherwise require separate implementation. Compare the estimated effort in the current delivery approach with the effort to model, validate, and deploy the same scope. |
| Collaboration and team capacity | MDriven supports collaborative development, version control, and participation by business analysts through a model-first approach. | Compare the roles and review cycles required for an initial release today with a process in which business stakeholders and delivery staff review the same model. |
| Rework during delivery | MDriven states that live execution of models supports immediate feedback and iteration. | Run an approval-workflow prototype with its users. Record issues found before deployment, such as a missing approval state, and compare this with the effort required to discover and correct similar issues later in the delivery process. |
| Change and maintenance effort | MDriven states that modeled systems can be adapted to new requirements without redesigning the core structure, and that executable models keep documentation aligned with code and functionality. | For a policy change, identify the affected rules, workflow, views, data structures, and documentation in the current system. Compare this with the work needed to update and validate the modeled application. |
| Technical debt and recurring maintenance | MDriven states that it generates code and logic from structured models and can reduce technical debt associated with hand-coded systems. | Include recurring maintenance work in the comparison, such as correcting duplicated rules, making manual schema changes, and locating undocumented behavior. |
| Knowledge-transfer risk | The Evaluation Guide describes visual models and built-in documentation as transparent, reusable representations of business logic. | Assess the onboarding and handover effort when a project team member changes. Determine whether the model documents the business rules, workflows, and data relationships needed by a replacement team member. |
| Legacy modernization | The Evaluation Guide states that MDriven can work alongside legacy systems, supports integration with C and APIs, and offers reverse-engineering capabilities intended to accelerate migration. | Identify the interfaces, legacy functions, and data structures that must remain in operation. Estimate the effort for incremental integration or modernization rather than assuming a full replacement. |
Build a cost comparison
Use delivery data from your own organization to compare alternatives.
- Define a comparable scope, such as one release containing customer records, an order workflow, user-facing views, and reporting rules.
- Record the current baseline, including team effort, delivery duration, rework, maintenance work, hosting, tool licenses, and support.
- Identify the work MDriven automates for that scope. Consider database generation, UI creation, business-rule enforcement, data management, and documentation maintenance where applicable.
- Estimate remaining work, including model design, domain decisions, testing, integration, deployment, and ongoing operations.
- Compare initial delivery cost and the expected cost of changes after release over the period relevant to the decision.
- Review assumptions with business stakeholders and the delivery team. MDriven positions shared models as a way to keep business rules and workflows visible across stakeholders.
Include platform and hosting costs
Separate delivery-effort estimates from the cost of using and operating the platform. MDriven pricing states that, when using your own cloud service provider, you pay that provider for resources and pay MDriven for tool usage, license, and support.
For a SaaS application in which each tenant has a separate database, the pricing documentation says to calculate the execution price including add-ons per site and multiply it by the number of sites.
Confirm current prices and the applicable usage measures in the MDriven portal before making a budget decision, because the pricing documentation directs readers there for Turnkey prices.
Example: assessing a workflow change
Suppose an internal purchasing application needs a new approval rule. Establish a baseline for the work required to change the relevant business logic, views, tests, documentation, and any affected data behavior in the current approach. Then assess whether the rule can be represented in the MDriven model and validate the changed workflow with affected users.
Record the actual effort and outcomes. This creates organization-specific evidence for later estimates rather than assuming a savings percentage.