Custom eCommerce development

Custom eCommerce Development

Design and build the commerce capabilities that packaged workflows cannot support — from B2B approvals and pricing to marketplaces, configurators and channel APIs.

For commerce teams with differentiated workflows, several channels or legacy constraints that cannot be solved safely with another plug-in.
Business rules are trapped in workarounds, manual operations or a platform that no longer fits.An owned capability with explicit boundaries, tested contracts and a delivery path your team can continue.
Commercial summary

A focused way to buy custom commerce engineering.

Best for
B2B rules, marketplaces, configurators, multi-channel orchestration and staged legacy replacement.
Typical first step
A focused discovery that tests the business case, boundaries, dependencies and build-vs-buy options.
Inputs
Current workflows, constraints, system access or diagrams, representative data and the people who own the process.
Outputs
A decision, capability boundary, delivery backlog and the technical artifacts needed for the next stage.
Working model
A joint product and engineering engagement with named decisions, review points and client ownership.
Current state → desired outcome

Replace hidden operational risk with an owned capability.

Current state
  • Manual approvals and spreadsheet rules
  • Business logic spread across plug-ins and services
  • Channels coupled directly to legacy systems
  • Changes require risky all-at-once releases
Desired outcome
  • Explicit workflows with accountable owners
  • Rules located in a maintainable capability
  • Stable contracts protect channels and systems
  • Capabilities delivered and verified in stages
Build decision

Platform, hybrid or custom: choose the smallest justified ownership.

Custom development is valuable when it protects a differentiated operating model. It is wasteful when a supported platform workflow already meets the need.

01

Platform

Use supported platform features when the workflow is standard and lower ownership cost matters most.

Boundary: configure and extend without rebuilding commodity commerce.
02

Hybrid

Keep catalogue, checkout or orders on a platform while owning one differentiated capability behind stable contracts.

Boundary: custom code owns only the business-specific rules.
03

Custom

Build an owned service or platform when workflows, channels or control requirements are materially different.

Boundary: accept ongoing product, security and operational ownership.
Bring us the workflow that does not fitDiscuss a custom capability →
Scope

Six areas where custom development can create a defensible capability.

01

B2B accounts and approvals

Account structures, roles, negotiated terms and approval paths match the real sales model.

Boundary: Does not include inventing commercial policy or cleaning all customer master data.

02

Marketplace operations

Seller onboarding, catalogue controls, commissions, orders and exceptions become explicit workflows.

Boundary: Payment or payout compliance remains with qualified providers and client advisers.

03

Product configuration

Rules, compatibility and quote logic are represented in a testable model.

Boundary: Product rules and source data must be supplied and owned by the client.

04

Commerce APIs

Channels use versioned contracts for catalogue, pricing, cart, order or account capabilities.

Boundary: An API does not replace ownership of source-system quality or availability.

05

Channel orchestration

Web, mobile, partner and assisted-sales channels share capabilities without sharing fragile UI logic.

Boundary: Each channel experience is scoped separately unless explicitly included.

06

Staged modernisation

A legacy area is replaced behind a controlled boundary instead of a big-bang rewrite.

Boundary: Third-party licences, vendor changes and unrelated legacy remediation are excluded.

Delivery process

Four stages, each ending in a reviewable output.

01

Discover

InputsWorkflows, constraints, systems, representative data and stakeholder context.
ActionMap decisions, failure modes, dependencies and evidence gaps.
OutputProblem frame, risk map and build-vs-buy questions.
02

Shape

InputsApproved problem frame and access to technical owners.
ActionDefine boundaries, contracts, data ownership and thin vertical slices.
OutputArchitecture decision, delivery backlog and acceptance criteria.
03

Build

InputsPrioritised slice, environments, test data and review owners.
ActionImplement the capability with automated checks, observability and controlled integration.
OutputWorking increment, source code, tests and operational documentation.
04

Evolve

InputsProduction evidence, incidents, usage and business feedback.
ActionReview outcomes, remove bottlenecks and sequence the next capability.
OutputMeasured findings, updated backlog and handoff or support plan.
Deliverables and commercial model

Know what is produced, who participates and where ownership sits.

Core artifacts

  1. 01Capability and domain map
  2. 02Architecture decision records
  3. 03API or event contracts
  4. 04Prioritised delivery backlog
  5. 05Source code and automated checks for built scope
  6. 06Operational notes, handoff record and next-step plan

Working team

The exact team follows the scope. It can combine architecture, backend, frontend, quality and delivery roles; the proposal should name the roles required for the selected capability.

Ownership and IP

The client owns the project-specific source code and agreed project artifacts delivered for the engagement, subject to the signed contract and any identified third-party or pre-existing components.

Handoff and support

Handoff covers repositories, agreed documentation, known risks and an ownership walkthrough. Continued delivery or support is a separate agreed scope, not an automatic dependency.

Not included by default

  • Third-party licences and vendor fees
  • Legal, tax, payment or regulatory certification
  • Complete source-data cleansing
  • 24/7 operations or support unless contracted
  • Unrelated replacement of surrounding systems

What affects price

  • Number and complexity of workflows
  • Systems and contracts involved
  • Data quality and migration needs
  • Security, compliance and access constraints
  • Channels, environments and release requirements
  • Required team shape and ownership model
Evidence

A sample decision package — not a client claim.

No verified public case is assigned to this service. Until evidence is approved, the page shows the structure of a useful result rather than invented outcomes.

Sample artifact structure
01Decision context

Business constraint, options, assumptions and decision owner

02Capability boundary

Responsibilities, data ownership and dependencies

03Contract surface

Commands, events, errors, versioning and access rules

04Delivery slice

Acceptance evidence, rollout, observability and handoff

FAQ and next step

Questions to resolve before custom development starts.

How do we know custom development is justified?

The first step compares supported platform workflows, extensions, hybrid boundaries and custom ownership against the operating model. A custom build should survive that comparison.

Can you take over an existing custom platform?

Yes, after reviewing the codebase, architecture, delivery path, dependencies and operational risks. The review defines what can be changed safely before delivery scope is agreed.

What does Flexor need from our team?

Access to the relevant workflows, technical context, representative data, system owners and people authorised to make product and architecture decisions.

Does the engagement include design, integrations and infrastructure?

Only where they are required by the agreed capability. Storefront design, surrounding integrations and infrastructure are scoped explicitly rather than assumed.

Who owns the code and documentation?

Project-specific deliverables are handed to the client under the signed agreement. Third-party and pre-existing components are identified separately.

What happens after we contact you?

We review the workflow and constraints you share, identify missing context and propose the smallest useful next step. A delivery commitment is made only after scope and responsibilities are agreed.

Start with the capability that creates the most operational friction.

Share the workflow, the systems it touches and why the current approach no longer works. We will use that context to define the next decision.

Start the technical conversation →