Run the buy-the-workaround test before your next build-versus-buy call
Map the workaround your team already uses, check where data and permissions live, and ask vendors what their roadmap covers before deciding to build, buy, or lock in.
Your team has already solved a problem with a third-party tool. The build-versus-buy question is now whether to keep the workaround. Databricks acquired Row Zero, a company that makes a spreadsheet tool for large datasets. Run the buy-the-workaround test first. It turns a messy adoption into a decision you can defend.
The workaround is the spec
Databricks reached a purchase agreement for Row Zero on September 24, without disclosing the deal terms. Row Zero had secured $13 million in funding before the Databricks transaction. TechCrunch, relying on PitchBook, reported a $10 million seed round for Row Zero in May 2025 at an estimated $40 million valuation.
The pattern is a platform owner absorbing a workflow its users already adopted. When an analyst, operator, or engineer adds a tool to the platform you run, that workaround is a market signal. It marks where your core product stops and where users spend time, often the clearest spec you get before a vendor or an internal build.
The test turns adoption into a decision
- Map the glue.
- Check whether data and permissions stay in your core platform.
- Ask the vendor what its roadmap now covers.
List every export, connector, script, and manual copy that moves data from your core platform into the workaround. The map is a one-page inventory: source, destination, owner, frequency, and the pain that would return if the workaround disappeared.
Ask where the workaround stores rows, who can see them, and whether access controls live in your platform or in the tool. The check is a permission matrix: which users can create, edit, share, and delete, and where the audit trail ends.
Row Zero's spreadsheet can hold up to 1 billion rows. That scale changes the question from convenience to governance. If the workaround is already holding large datasets, the buy or build decision must include access control, retention, and lineage.
Databricks will embed the spreadsheet in Genie across web, desktop, and mobile, using Genie Ontology, Unity Catalog, and Unity Gateway. That kind of embedding is the test: does the vendor put the tool inside your governance layer, or does it create a second system of record?
Do not ask whether the vendor can support your use case. Ask what it is building next, what it has already built for customers like you, and what it will not build. The answer should be written: named features, target dates, and the limits of the current product.
Tabular, a 2021 startup based in San Jose, California, had raised $37 million before agreeing to be acquired by Databricks. Databricks disclosed the Tabular deal on June 4, and it was its fifth acquisition in the prior year. Before the acquisition, Databricks had already introduced three-way compatibility across Iceberg, Hudi, and Delta Lake.
Databricks called the Tabular acquisition a way to let enterprises use both Delta Lake and Apache Iceberg on one platform instead of being locked into a single format. Databricks confirmed the acquisition cost more than $1 billion, although it did not disclose the exact price.
The mistake is treating a vendor's current demo as a roadmap. A demo shows what the vendor can do today. The roadmap tells you whether your workaround is becoming a product or a migration project.
The decision is buy, build, or lock in
Buy when the vendor's roadmap covers your core workflow and the governance boundary stays inside your platform. Build if the workaround is a differentiator and the vendor will not keep the data and permissions in your core platform. Lock in if the team's adoption is already the product, the cost is low, and the workaround is unlikely to become a compliance or security problem. When the answer is unclear, default to the option that keeps the data closest to your core platform.
