Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
The day we calculated we had 40 days left before bankruptcy, I realized we weren’t just struggling with sales — we had a fundamental process problem that was undermining everything we’d built.
It was 2014, and our custom software development company had been operating for seven years. We had talented developers, we delivered quality code and our clients were generally satisfied with our technical work. Yet we remained what I’d call a “garage company” — unable to break through to sustainable growth despite our technical capabilities.
The technical excellence trap
Like many software companies founded by developers, we’d fallen into a common trap: believing that technical excellence would naturally translate to business success.
We’d spent years perfecting our coding practices, learning new frameworks and delivering solid software solutions. Our assumption was that good work would speak for itself. What we hadn’t realized at the time was that our internal processes were creating friction that technical skill alone couldn’t overcome.
Key warning signs we often ignored:
- Client relationships starting well but becoming tense during project progression
- Operating in reactive mode rather than a proactive communication
- Working hard but not getting referrals
- Difficulty predicting timelines despite technical competence
Identifying process gaps
We started examining our processes systematically and discovered that one of our big blind spots at the time was client communication during development. We were excellent at understanding technical requirements and delivering solutions, but we hadn’t developed effective ways to align with clients about progress, setbacks or changes.
This created a pattern where clients felt disconnected from their own projects, and often had wrong expectations. According to Project.co’s 2025 survey, 68% of people have stopped dealing with a company and moved to a competitor due to poor business communication skills, yet we were optimizing purely for technical outcomes.
The partnership management solution
Rather than implementing standard project management methodology immediately, we focused on what we called “partnership management” — actively managing client relationships alongside technical delivery.
Our partnership management strategy included assigning dedicated relationship managers to each project, implementing proactive communication rather than reactive updates, translating technical realities into business language and vice versa, focusing on alignment rather than just reporting status and developing templates for common scenarios such as scope changes, delays and onboarding.
The impact exceeded our expectations. Clients began expressing greater confidence in our work, even when projects encountered technical difficulties.
Creating a structure that works
As communication processes improved, we addressed other operational areas that needed structure. We adopted Scrum methodology but adapted it to include regular client involvement rather than treating it as an internal-only framework.
Key areas we improved included standardizing how we onboard new clients, creating consistent project kickoffs and milestone reviews, setting up clear processes for handling scope changes and technical issues, adding regular project reviews that incorporated client feedback and tracking both project delivery and the overall health of client relationships.
These changes helped ensure that every engagement started with a clear framework and continued with structured checkpoints to keep projects on track.
We also began measuring a broader range of metrics, including client satisfaction, communication frequency and relationship health. We were able to better understand how clients experienced our work, identify potential issues earlier and strengthen the trust and transparency that are critical to long-term partnerships.
Overcoming challenges
The transition wasn’t without difficulties. Some team members initially resisted additional structure, viewing it as bureaucracy.
The key was showing how the new processes actually made their work easier rather than harder. We kept systems flexible while maintaining consistency, and when we saw early improvements, we made sure to acknowledge them. Training everyone on the new communication and project management approaches took some time, but people gradually saw the benefits.
What I found interesting was how process improvements affected our internal culture. Having clearer systems reduced day-to-day confusion and freed up mental space for more creative and strategic thinking.
Measuring success
The changes didn’t happen overnight, but we started seeing meaningful progress that accumulated over time. Client satisfaction improved dramatically, our project timelines became much more reliable, and referral business grew substantially. Our team seemed genuinely happier and more engaged, too.
What started as operational fixes gradually transformed how we worked. By 2018, we’d evolved from a struggling garage company into an organization that caught the attention of potential acquirers. Our technical skills were still crucial, but it was the solid operational foundation — combined with other strategic improvements we’d made — that really made us attractive to potential partners.
Tips for growing software companies
Our experience suggests that process innovation can be as important as technical innovation, particularly during growth phases.
Here are some starting points for similar cases:
- Audit client experience from their perspective, not just technical delivery
- Identify communication gaps in your current project workflows
- Implement regular check-ins and reporting systems to keep everyone aligned on progress
- Assign relationship management responsibilities
- Measure client satisfaction alongside technical metrics
- Create templates for common scenarios to ensure consistency
The most valuable lesson may be that building sustainable business processes is itself a technical problem worth solving systematically — it just requires different tools and approaches than writing software.
