When systems stall after go-live, the issue often isn’t the tech – it’s capacity, ownership and support focused on continuous improvement, rather than technical fixes.
It is one of the most common missteps in modern project delivery: treating SaaS platforms like legacy systems. A new tool is purchased, excitement builds – and then, over time, the system delivers little more than a like-for-like replacement. Instead of evolving alongside the business, the platform quietly replicates existing processes while new features and capabilities go unnoticed.
While new technology will always have its place, many Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platforms are under-leveraged not because they’re outdated, but because no one is tracking their continuous evolution. Over time, teams begin working around the system – exporting data, building manual workarounds or adding side processes to compensate. The platform becomes ‘just good enough’ to keep in place: too costly to replace, but not valuable enough to justify the original investment.
Most project professionals have seen this pattern before, often dressed up as a success story, even when the promised transformation never materialised.
While it’s tempting to blame the project team, this is rarely a sign of a poor initial implementation. Instead, it’s what tends to happen when systems are not actively managed after go-live. The roadmap, if there was one, hasn’t been revisited; and meanwhile, the original vendor or implementation partner has disappeared into the night.
And while nothing is visibly broken, the slow erosion of value continues – often unnoticed – until the limitations start to bite.
SaaS is built to evolve – but only if you let it
This challenge is especially frustrating with SaaS platforms. Unlike traditional systems, SaaS products are designed to improve continuously. New features, integrations and workflow enhancements are released regularly, adding functionality that didn’t exist at go-live. Almost without exception, SaaS core platforms and other enterprise tools of today look very different twelve months in than they did on day one.
However, if no one inside your business is paying attention, those improvements often go unnoticed. Your system keeps running exactly as it did when you first switched it on – even as its capabilities expand in the background.
The gap between what’s available and what’s actually being used can widen quickly. When your teams are already stretched, there is rarely the capacity to go looking for hidden features or smarter workflows. Without the space to reassess, or the support to explore what’s changed, new system optimisation quickly drops off the priority list.
In most cases, it’s not the system that is failing – it’s the lack of time, bandwidth or capability to explore what it could be doing better. The people closest to the platform are often focused on day-to-day tasks. They know how it works in the current setup, but they’re not always equipped – or even empowered – to push its boundaries. When roadmaps don’t get revisited, and vendors are no longer actively engaged, it becomes almost impossible to see what’s changed or where the next opportunity might be.
Without clear ownership, defined improvement cycles or a strategic view of how the system supports broader goals, even well-established, market-leading platforms can easily fail to live up to their promise. Systems that once felt fit-for-purpose gradually lose alignment with how the business operates, until the cost of optimisation starts to look almost as hard to justify as the cost of change.
Optimisation is still change
When we talk about system change, it’s easy to picture major replatforming or large-scale transformation. However, in constrained environments – where gaining executive- or board-level approval for a new investment is a challenge – incremental change can be just as powerful, and far more achievable.
Reconfiguring a workflow or switching on an underused feature in your existing system might not feel like transformation, but the cumulative effect can be significant. These are often the improvements that free up time and make it easier for teams to get their work done. Most importantly, they don’t require a business case the size of a launch deck.
However, what they do require is someone with the time and perspective to see what’s possible. And that’s often what’s missing: not ambition and not technology, but bandwidth, capability and support.
The perspective that makes a difference
Unlocking more from your systems doesn’t always require a ‘big bang’ project. Sometimes, it just takes the right conversation. The leaders who do this well aren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest budgets – they’re the ones who tap into the ecosystem around them.
Vendor partners, customer success teams, implementation specialists and fractional project executives can all offer insight into what’s possible, what’s new and what’s worth revisiting. Creating space to engage with people who see these systems across multiple organisations can surface opportunities that simply don’t appear when you’re deep in your own operational context.
Often, the first step isn’t more funding or a new platform. It’s finding someone who can help you see what’s already within reach.
Unlock the SaaS you already own
If your SaaS platforms are still running as they did at go-live, you could be missing out on significant value. The features, workflows and efficiencies you need might already be there – hidden in plain sight. Not sure where to start? Book a brainstorm with one of Quay’s experts and we’ll help you uncover what your systems could be doing for you.
To find out more about how Quay Consulting can help your team manage benefit risk in your organisation, please contact us.
We believe that quality thought leadership is worth sharing and encourage you to share with your colleagues. If you’re interested in republishing our content, here’s what’s okay and what’s not okay.