Custom Software Development
Custom software, specified properly before it is built.
Most failed builds were mis-specified long before they were mis-coded. We spend real time on what you are actually trying to change about how your business runs, then build to that.
The problem we solve
What actually goes wrong.
Off-the-shelf software forces your process into someone else’s model. Teams absorb the mismatch with spreadsheets, side systems, and manual steps that nobody has time to document. The cost is invisible until someone leaves and takes the workaround with them.
The alternative usually fails for the opposite reason. A bespoke build starts from a wishlist rather than a process, the scope inflates during development, and what ships is a slower version of the thing it replaced.
The difference is almost never the code. It is whether anyone modelled the operating process accurately before development began — including the exceptions people handle by instinct and never mention in a requirements workshop.
What's included
Activity, deliverable, and how long it takes.
| Activity | Deliverable | Typical duration |
|---|---|---|
| Discovery & process modelling | Current-state map, requirements document, agreed scope boundary | 2–4 weeks |
| Solution architecture | Architecture document, data model, integration map, decision records | 1–2 weeks |
| Build | Working software in two-week increments, demonstrated each sprint | Scope-dependent |
| Quality assurance | Test plan, automated regression suite, defect log | Runs alongside build |
| UAT & deployment | UAT support, release notes, runbook, production cutover | 1–3 weeks |
| Warranty | Defect fixes at no cost within the agreed window | Per SOW |
How we deliver it
Requirements rigour and long-term maintainability.
- 01
Model the process, not the wishlist
We sit with the people who do the work, not only the people who commissioned the project. Exceptions and workarounds get documented, because those are what break a system three months after launch.
- 02
Draw the scope boundary explicitly
The requirements document states what is out of scope as clearly as what is in. Ambiguity here is what turns into a change-request argument later.
- 03
Choose the architecture deliberately
We default to a modular monolith and justify anything more distributed. A small team should not be paying a microservices operations tax to solve a problem that does not need it.
- 04
Build in demonstrable increments
Every sprint ends in working software you can use, not a status percentage. If something is at risk, you hear it at that demo rather than at the end.
- 05
Hand over so it survives us
Architecture decision records, a runbook, and a walkthrough with whoever will maintain it. The measure of the handover is whether another team could take it on without calling us.
Technology & tooling
What we build this with.
- Backend
- Node.js
- NestJS
- Python
- FastAPI
- Django
- Frontend
- React
- Next.js
- TypeScript
- Tailwind CSS
- Data
- PostgreSQL
- Redis
- Prisma
- Delivery
- Docker
- GitHub Actions
- Terraform
Typical engagement
What this usually looks like.
- Team shape
- A delivery manager, two to four engineers, and QA — composition agreed per engagement rather than drawn from a standing bench.
- Duration
- Typically three to nine months for a first production release.
- Engagement models that suit it
- Fixed-Scope Project
- Dedicated Team / Pod
Questions we get asked
Answered properly, not deflected.
How do you estimate a build when the requirements are still moving?
We do not give a fixed price against a moving scope, because that only produces an argument later. We propose a paid discovery phase that produces a requirements document and a scope boundary, then estimate against that. If you decide not to continue after discovery, the document is yours.
Who owns the intellectual property?
You do. IP assignment is written into the SOW and takes effect on payment. You also get repository access from day one, not at the end of the engagement.
What happens when scope changes mid-build?
It is raised as a written change request, estimated, and approved before any work starts. Nothing gets quietly absorbed and nothing gets quietly dropped to make room.
Can our own developers work alongside your team?
Yes, and it usually improves the handover. We agree the branching model, review policy, and definition of done up front so two teams are not working to different standards.
What happens if we want to take the project in-house later?
That is a normal outcome, not a failure. Documentation and knowledge transfer are part of the engagement rather than a paid extra, and we will run a handover period with your team.
Do you work fixed-price or time-and-materials?
Both. Fixed price suits a signed, stable scope; a monthly pod rate suits an evolving roadmap. We will tell you which one your requirement actually fits, including when that is the cheaper option for you.
Other capabilities
The rest of what Laxora builds.
Have a custom software development requirement?
Tell us what you are trying to achieve and what constraints you are working under. We will come back within one business day with an honest view of scope and approach.
- First response within one business day
- NDA in place before any disclosure
- Scoped proposal, not a generic quote