4 common reasons why your low code project fails

In recent years, businesses have opted for low-code tools. Low-code tools are tools that allow people to build apps without needing to code like a developer.

For employees who do not know how to code, these tools provide a very useful way to construct applications. This is what many people mean when they talk about "citizen development."

As of now, 64 % of IT professionals are using low-code as their primary workaround solution. It's not surprising that we're seeing this transition in application development at a time when the demand for apps is higher than the number of trained individuals.

Low-code software solutions are really great, but they're not magic. If you have unrealistic expectations, you're going to be disappointed. The following is a list of some of the most typical reasons why firms' low-code projects fail:

1. People with the wrong skills are using low-code tools.

Low-code tools have been hailed as platforms that amateurs (also known as citizen developers) may use to quickly construct programs. Although, their true purpose is not to assist anybody in finding a solution to anything. 

The majority of people can play chopsticks on the piano, and some can play beautiful music, but only a handful can perform as concert pianists. In all cases, the instrument used is the same, but as the complexity of the task increases, more expertise is needed.

Real-world challenges in business always need the use of low-code technologies. The right people can use them to make digital transformation happen faster. Low-code tools are great for people who can code. Additionally, low-code tools make it easier to do more in less time.

2. The right people are getting tools, but they are misusing them.

Using low-code, professionals can produce apps faster, but if they don't listen to the business stakeholder, they will still design defective programs. Their only difference will be they'll do it quicker.

Tools that need low levels of coding are not a panacea for incompetent developers.In order to succeed in low-code initiatives, we need to continue to approach them as genuine, professional software development projects.

If you assume that your app will work well after you launch it, you will probably be wrong. You need to test it before you launch it. Agile development is the best way to do this. Agile development means that you build the product in small pieces and you test it as you build it. You can do it in a low-cost way, too.

Testing is important to make sure the application works right. Without testing, you might not know if the application is working right. You might think it is working right, but it might not be. You have to make sure the application is working right before you release it.

3. Not dealing with deployment and maintenance.

The production mode is used for the construction of many low-code projects. For example, let's imagine that we constructed a system for processing help desk tickets or expenditure reports. And then I come up with a brilliant and helpful approach to enhance it. 

The likelihood is high that this will render the remedy ineffective (which is bad). Or, when I build new features in production, my modifications may irritate other users and make it more difficult for them to locate the information they want.

It is tempting to make rapid and (apparently) beneficial changes whenever an idea strikes when using low-code technologies. Although, it is still very vital to test and verify, as well as prepare and teach IT and users, before just releasing a change into the world. When developing in production, there is always the risk of interfering with user activities or corrupting live data. 

Change management is not the top concern for many citizen developer initiatives, which is true of many of those projects. Although there may be a capability for packaging and deploying one-time deliverables. 

This process often ends up completely overwriting the application that was first used. The term "actual change management" is seldom used to describe the services offered by low-code platform providers.

4. Focusing on building the application and not considering how to deliver it.

Building the application takes just 10% of the entire process of delivering it. Low-code tools, for instance, won't be able to help you in developing an effective design for your solution. You have to make sure that it works the way it is supposed to and is secure to use.

The default setting for low-code platforms is often to give users the privilege of doing anything the solution builder may do. All superfluous user credentials are revoked by the person who designed the solution. 

What about inspections and checks? In most situations, you are on your own. Documentation? Education? Maintenance procedures? In most cases, they are either done manually or not at all. 

If you solely concentrate on developing an application, you could produce something that is brilliant in the short term but that is badly planned, not compliant, and insecure in the long term. This would be the result of only concentrating on constructing the application.

Using low-code technologies is seeing consistent growth in popularity. Businesses will be in a better position to avoid the typical pitfalls associated with low-code projects if they have a deeper understanding of how these technologies operate. Low-code development is still developing.