Converia vs. In-house Development
Universities, research institutions, and larger organizations in particular face a fundamental decision when digitizing their conferences: Should they use existing conference software, or is it worth developing their own solution? In-house development can be tailored precisely to one's own processes. Existing systems, institutional requirements, and specific workflows can be accommodated without having to adapt to the structures of standard software. This is particularly beneficial for organizations with their own IT departments and highly specific requirements. Converia takes the opposite approach: many typical scientific conference workflows are already built into the software. These include participant management, abstract submission and reviewing, program planning, payment management, conference websites, and check-in. Converia describes these functions as a cohesive process, from registration and abstract management to check-in. The crucial question, therefore, is not whether in-house development is inherently more or less capable. The deciding factor is which functions actually need to be developed individually and which are already available as established standard processes.
Summary
In-house development offers the greatest possible creative freedom. Data models, user interfaces, interfaces, and processes can be precisely aligned with the organization's needs. Even unusual requirements or particularly tight integration with existing IT systems can be implemented. This advantage comes with a trade-off: the organization takes on not only the development but also the long-term responsibility for operation, maintenance, further development, security, troubleshooting, and adjustments to changing requirements. The actual scale of this effort depends heavily on the scope of the in-house development and the available IT resources. In contrast, Converia provides an extensive functional toolkit for scientific conferences. Participant registration, tickets, invoices, and payments are included, as are abstract submission, reviewing, program planning, and check-in. This is where the two approaches differ most regarding the "build or buy" question: in-house development offers maximum control and customization, whereas Converia reduces the number of functions an institution must develop and maintain itself over the long term.
The key differences at a glance
Highly specific workflows that cannot be mapped in standard software
Highly customizable standard software that is continuously updated to meet technological and regulatory standards. High flexibility with minimal internal staffing requirements.
FAQ
Can Converia accommodate individual requirements?
At the technological level, Converia provides an integration layer that incorporates connectivity into an organizer's IT ecosystem directly into its core architecture. In terms of personal support, our dedicated account managers and customer service representatives are always ready to listen to your specific needs. We will advise you on how best to implement your requirements using Converia.
Not sure what’s right for you?
Converia ROI Calculator
We estimate your savings over three years and find the right package for you.