Why us
Us vs. the alternatives
An honest look at how a fixed-scope automation partner compares to hiring in-house, using no-code tools yourself, or a traditional dev agency.
| Dimension | LogisBridge | In-house hire | No-code (Zapier/Make) | Traditional dev agency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to first working automation | Days to a few weeks | Months, after hiring and ramp-up | Fast for simple triggers, stalls on complex logic | Weeks to months, plus discovery overhead |
| Operations domain expertise | Built by people who've run the operations | Depends entirely on who you hire | None — you design the logic yourself | Usually generalist developers, not operators |
| Handles complex logic & exceptions | Yes, by design | Depends on hire's experience | Limited — breaks down past simple workflows | Yes, but may need extra scoping cycles |
| Cost model | Fixed-scope project or retainer | Full-time salary + benefits, year-round | Cheap per-tool, but you absorb the build time | Often higher overhead, longer contracts |
| Ongoing maintenance | Included monitoring + optional retainer | On the hire — a single point of failure | On your team | Usually a separate support contract |
| Works with your existing tools | Yes — no rip-and-replace | Depends on hire's familiarity with your stack | Only for tools with existing connectors | Varies by vendor |