{"id":42043,"date":"2026-10-27T13:06:25","date_gmt":"2026-10-27T13:06:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/?p=42043"},"modified":"2026-10-27T13:06:25","modified_gmt":"2026-10-27T13:06:25","slug":"outcome-based-software-development","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/","title":{"rendered":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"TLDR\"><\/span><strong>TL;DR:<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>More developers do not automatically translate into faster delivery, better software, or stronger business performance.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Outcome-based software development<\/strong> prioritizes measurable results, quality, and accountability over the number of people assigned to a project.<\/li>\n<li>Staff augmentation still makes sense when organizations have strong internal delivery ownership and need additional capabilities.<\/li>\n<li>Effective engagements connect engineering KPIs with business objectives, clear acceptance criteria, and shared responsibilities.<\/li>\n<li>Long-term value depends on what happens after go-live, not simply whether a project launches.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>A larger engineering team can increase development capacity. It cannot guarantee better business outcomes.<\/p>\n<p>When software delivery falls behind, the immediate response is often to hire more developers, expand an offshore team, or increase outsourcing budgets. The assumption is straightforward: more engineering resources should mean more work gets completed.<\/p>\n<p>But headcount is only one input into software delivery.<\/p>\n<p>Projects can still suffer from unclear requirements, slow decisions, integration bottlenecks, technical debt, and weak ownership. Adding developers to an inefficient delivery process may increase coordination costs without resolving the underlying problem.<\/p>\n<p>This is why technology leaders should evaluate <strong>outcome-based software development<\/strong> rather than treating engineering capacity as the primary measure of value.<\/p>\n<p>The objective is not to eliminate staff augmentation. It is to select a delivery model based on what the business needs to achieve, who controls the work, and how success will be measured.<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/smd-wp-website-media.s3.eu-west-3.amazonaws.com\/0565\/ChatGPT+Image+Oct+27%2C+2026%2C+07_59_54+PM-2.png\" \/><\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Hidden_Problem_with_Buying_Engineering_Headcount\"><\/span>The Hidden Problem with Buying Engineering Headcount<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Buying engineering headcount increases access to technical capacity, but the customer often remains responsible for turning that capacity into business results.<\/p>\n<p>That distinction matters because engineering productivity depends on much more than the number of available developers.<\/p>\n<h4>More Developers Do Not Automatically Mean Faster Delivery<\/h4>\n<p>Software development involves interconnected activities: architecture, requirements, implementation, testing, integration, security, deployment, and operational support.<\/p>\n<p>When one activity becomes a bottleneck, adding people elsewhere may have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>Consider a hypothetical company with an eight-person engineering team struggling to release new functionality because every deployment requires lengthy manual approval and integration testing.<\/p>\n<p>Adding four developers might increase the amount of code produced. However, unless the team also improves its release process, the additional work may simply accumulate before deployment.<\/p>\n<p>The business still experiences delayed releases.<\/p>\n<p>Before expanding capacity, leaders should ask:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Where is work actually slowing down?<\/li>\n<li>Which constraints prevent features from reaching production?<\/li>\n<li>Does the team lack engineering skills, delivery coordination, or decision-making authority?<\/li>\n<li>Who is responsible for resolving cross-functional dependencies?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Hiring can solve genuine capacity shortages. It cannot compensate for an operating model that fails to convert engineering effort into delivered value.<\/p>\n<h4>When Activity Metrics Replace Business Outcomes<\/h4>\n<p>Traditional outsourcing engagements often emphasize resource-oriented measures such as:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Number of full-time equivalent developers<\/li>\n<li>Billable engineering hours<\/li>\n<li>Sprint velocity<\/li>\n<li>Completed development tasks<\/li>\n<li>Resource utilization<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>These metrics can support workforce planning and delivery management. However, none independently demonstrates whether the software creates business value.<\/p>\n<p>A team may complete every assigned ticket while users continue to experience unreliable performance.<\/p>\n<p>Another team might produce fewer features but eliminate a critical bottleneck affecting thousands of transactions.<\/p>\n<p>The second outcome may be more valuable despite requiring less visible development activity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The real problem is not measuring engineering activity. It is treating activity as proof of success.<\/strong><\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"What_Does_Outcome-Based_Software_Development_Actually_Mean\"><\/span>What Does Outcome-Based Software Development Actually Mean?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Outcome-based software development is an approach in which engineering priorities, delivery accountability, and success measures are organized around defined business or operational results rather than resource consumption alone.<\/p>\n<p>These results might include reduced processing time, improved reliability, faster product releases, lower operating costs, or more consistent software quality.<\/p>\n<p>Importantly, an outcome-driven approach does not automatically require an outcome-based pricing contract.<\/p>\n<p>Organizations can establish outcome accountability under several commercial arrangements, provided that expectations and responsibilities are clearly defined.<\/p>\n<h4>From Resource Allocation to Delivery Accountability<\/h4>\n<p>In a resource-based engagement, the primary commercial commitment often concerns the engineering capacity supplied.<\/p>\n<p>For example, a vendor provides five developers with specified technical skills for an agreed period.<\/p>\n<p>The customer typically manages the product backlog, delivery priorities, architecture decisions, and acceptance process.<\/p>\n<p>In an outcome-driven engagement, discussions begin with the result the organization wants to achieve.<\/p>\n<p>Instead of asking, &#8220;How many developers can you provide?&#8221; the customer asks:<\/p>\n<p><em>What delivery capabilities, technical changes, and operating responsibilities are required to achieve this result?<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The engineering team is then structured around the agreed scope, constraints, dependencies, and success criteria.<\/p>\n<p>This shifts attention from team composition alone to delivery effectiveness.<\/p>\n<h4>Outputs, Outcomes, and Business Impact<\/h4>\n<p>A useful distinction is separating software outputs from operational outcomes and broader business impact.<\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th>Measurement Level<\/th>\n<th>What It Represents<\/th>\n<th>Example<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Input<\/td>\n<td>Resources invested<\/td>\n<td>Five developers assigned<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Activity<\/td>\n<td>Work performed<\/td>\n<td>Development hours and completed tasks<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Output<\/td>\n<td>Deliverable produced<\/td>\n<td>New customer onboarding module<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Outcome<\/td>\n<td>Operational improvement achieved<\/td>\n<td>Reduced onboarding processing time<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Business Impact<\/td>\n<td>Wider organizational value<\/td>\n<td>Lower servicing costs or improved customer experience<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>Each level has a role, but they should not be treated as interchangeable.<\/p>\n<p>For example, releasing an AI-powered document processing feature is an output. Reducing the time employees spend reviewing documents is an operational outcome.<\/p>\n<p>Whether that improvement contributes to profitability or customer retention depends on additional business conditions.<\/p>\n<p>Organizations should define those relationships before investing.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Headcount-Based_vs_Outcome-Based_Delivery_What_Changes\"><\/span>Headcount-Based vs. Outcome-Based Delivery: What Changes?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The difference between headcount-based and outcome-based delivery is primarily about accountability, measurement, and responsibility for execution.<\/p>\n<p>Neither model is universally superior. The right choice depends on how clearly the work can be defined and which party is capable of managing its dependencies.<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/smd-wp-website-media.s3.eu-west-3.amazonaws.com\/0565\/ChatGPT+Image+Oct+27%2C+2026%2C+07_59_53+PM-1.png\" \/><\/p>\n<h4>Comparing Delivery Models<\/h4>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th>Dimension<\/th>\n<th>Headcount-Based Delivery<\/th>\n<th>Outcome-Based Delivery<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Primary focus<\/td>\n<td>Engineering capacity<\/td>\n<td>Defined delivery results<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Planning<\/td>\n<td>Roles, skills, allocation<\/td>\n<td>Objectives, scope, acceptance criteria<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Management<\/td>\n<td>Usually customer-led<\/td>\n<td>Agreed delivery ownership<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Measurement<\/td>\n<td>Utilization, velocity, availability<\/td>\n<td>Quality, reliability, delivery and operational KPIs<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Scope flexibility<\/td>\n<td>Often high<\/td>\n<td>Depends on contract design<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Accountability<\/td>\n<td>Resource performance<\/td>\n<td>Agreed deliverables and controllable outcomes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Commercial model<\/td>\n<td>Often time and materials<\/td>\n<td>Fixed fee, milestone-based, hybrid, or outcome-linked<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Best suited for<\/td>\n<td>Evolving priorities and internal engineering leadership<\/td>\n<td>Measurable objectives with manageable dependencies<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>The distinction becomes particularly important when organizations expect a supplier to assume delivery responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If a vendor controls only staffing decisions but the customer controls architecture, priorities, and release approvals, it may be unreasonable to hold the vendor solely accountable for overall business outcomes.<\/p>\n<p>Accountability must reflect actual decision-making authority.<\/p>\n<h4>When Engineering Team Extension Is Still the Right Choice<\/h4>\n<p>Engineering team extension remains valuable when an organization already has effective internal delivery processes but needs additional expertise or capacity.<\/p>\n<p>For example, a SaaS company with an established product roadmap, experienced engineering leadership, and mature DevOps practices may need additional backend engineers to accelerate feature development.<\/p>\n<p>The organization does not necessarily need a vendor to take over delivery ownership.<\/p>\n<p>It needs capable engineers who can work within its existing operating model.<\/p>\n<p>Team extension can be appropriate when:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Product priorities change frequently.<\/li>\n<li>The organization wants direct control over engineering decisions.<\/li>\n<li>Internal teams own architecture and delivery management.<\/li>\n<li>Specialist expertise is needed for a defined period.<\/li>\n<li>Long-term product development requires flexible capacity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The strategic mistake is not buying headcount. It is buying headcount when the actual problem requires a different approach.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Five_Outcomes_Enterprises_Should_Measure_Instead_of_Headcount\"><\/span>Five Outcomes Enterprises Should Measure Instead of Headcount<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>An outcome-driven engineering engagement should focus on a small set of measurable results that reflect the organization&#8217;s delivery objectives.<\/p>\n<p>Five measurement categories provide a practical starting point.<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/smd-wp-website-media.s3.eu-west-3.amazonaws.com\/0565\/ChatGPT+Image+Oct+27%2C+2026%2C+07_59_56+PM-4.png\" \/><\/p>\n<h4>1. Time to Value<\/h4>\n<p>Time to value measures how quickly an engineering investment produces an agreed, usable benefit.<\/p>\n<p>Deployment alone may not establish value. A feature must also be adopted or contribute to an operational improvement.<\/p>\n<p>Potential indicators include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Lead time from approved requirement to production<\/li>\n<li>Time to first usable release<\/li>\n<li>Time from deployment to measurable adoption<\/li>\n<li>Time required to implement priority changes<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>For example, a business replacing manual reconciliation with an integrated workflow should measure how quickly the new process becomes operational, not simply when development is completed.<\/p>\n<h4>2. Software Quality and Reliability<\/h4>\n<p>Quality matters because defects and operational failures can reduce the value of otherwise successful releases.<\/p>\n<p>Relevant indicators may include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Change failure rate<\/li>\n<li>Production defect frequency<\/li>\n<li>Service availability<\/li>\n<li>Incident recovery time<\/li>\n<li>Escaped defects and rework<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>These measures should reflect the system&#8217;s importance and operating environment.<\/p>\n<p>A customer-facing payment platform may require different reliability targets from an internal reporting tool.<\/p>\n<h4>3. Delivery Predictability<\/h4>\n<p>Predictability allows organizations to plan product releases, coordinate business teams, and manage implementation risk.<\/p>\n<p>Useful measures include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Percentage of agreed milestones completed on schedule<\/li>\n<li>Delivery cycle-time trends<\/li>\n<li>Variance between forecast and actual completion<\/li>\n<li>Frequency of unplanned scope changes<\/li>\n<li>Dependency-related delays<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>A predictable delivery process does not mean requirements never change.<\/p>\n<p>It means changes are assessed, communicated, and incorporated into realistic delivery commitments.<\/p>\n<h4>4. Cost Efficiency<\/h4>\n<p>Cost efficiency should reflect the resources required to produce and sustain a usable result, not just the hourly cost of development.<\/p>\n<p>A lower hourly rate does not necessarily mean a lower total delivery cost.<\/p>\n<p>Relevant measures include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Cost per completed, accepted deliverable<\/li>\n<li>Rework cost<\/li>\n<li>Infrastructure and operating expenses<\/li>\n<li>Maintenance effort<\/li>\n<li>Total cost of ownership over an agreed period<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>For AI-enabled applications, organizations may also need to account for inference costs, evaluation, monitoring, and human review.<\/p>\n<p>These expenses can continue long after the initial deployment.<\/p>\n<h4>5. Post-Launch Performance<\/h4>\n<p>Post-launch performance measures whether software continues to operate effectively as business conditions change.<\/p>\n<p>Depending on the application, organizations might monitor:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Successful workflow completion rate<\/li>\n<li>User adoption<\/li>\n<li>Processing efficiency<\/li>\n<li>Incident resolution performance<\/li>\n<li>Service response time<\/li>\n<li>Ongoing operating costs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The selected KPIs should have clear definitions, reliable data sources, and named owners.<\/p>\n<p>A dashboard full of metrics is not automatically an effective performance-management system.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"How_to_Structure_an_Outcome-Driven_Engineering_Engagement\"><\/span>How to Structure an Outcome-Driven Engineering Engagement<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>An outcome-driven engagement starts with agreement on the business problem, the conditions for success, and the responsibilities required to deliver it.<\/p>\n<p>The commercial structure should reinforce these agreements rather than substitute for them.<\/p>\n<h4>Define Success Before Selecting a Team<\/h4>\n<p>Begin with the problem the organization wants to solve.<\/p>\n<p>Instead of specifying a requirement for six developers, consider a more useful objective:<\/p>\n<p><em>Reduce the time required to process customer onboarding applications while maintaining the required validation and review controls.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>This objective provides a direction but still needs a measurable baseline, target, timeline, and agreed scope.<\/p>\n<p>Only then should the parties determine the required architecture, engineering capacity, and delivery approach.<\/p>\n<h4>Establish Baselines and Acceptance Criteria<\/h4>\n<p>Outcome measurement is difficult without a reliable starting point.<\/p>\n<p>Before implementation, the customer and delivery partner should agree on:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Current performance baseline<\/li>\n<li>Target outcome<\/li>\n<li>Measurement method and data source<\/li>\n<li>Acceptance criteria<\/li>\n<li>Reporting frequency<\/li>\n<li>Dependencies and exclusions<\/li>\n<li>Process for resolving measurement disputes<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>For a hypothetical onboarding project, the baseline could be the median processing time measured over an agreed historical period.<\/p>\n<p>The target would then specify the improvement required and any quality safeguards that must remain satisfied.<\/p>\n<p>The contract should also explain what happens if measurement conditions change.<\/p>\n<p>According to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cio.com\/article\/274740\/outsourcing-sla-definitions-and-solutions.html\">CIO&#8217;s guidance on service-level agreements<\/a>, effective SLAs define measurable expectations, responsibilities, reporting arrangements, and procedures for addressing missed targets.<\/p>\n<h4>Assign Ownership Across Delivery Stages<\/h4>\n<p>Clear responsibilities reduce the likelihood that delivery problems become disputes between the customer and supplier.<\/p>\n<p>A practical responsibility model should address:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Business requirements and prioritization<\/li>\n<li>Technical architecture<\/li>\n<li>Development and quality assurance<\/li>\n<li>Security and compliance approvals<\/li>\n<li>Integration dependencies<\/li>\n<li>Production deployment<\/li>\n<li>Monitoring and incident response<\/li>\n<li>Continuous improvement<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Some responsibilities may remain with the customer even when the supplier owns implementation.<\/p>\n<p>For example, a delivery partner may control software engineering but depend on the customer to provide timely access to core systems.<\/p>\n<p>Performance commitments should reflect those dependencies.<\/p>\n<h4>Build Continuous Measurement into the Engagement<\/h4>\n<p>Outcome measurement should not begin at final acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Progressive reviews can identify whether technical delivery is producing the expected operational improvement.<\/p>\n<p>For an AI-enabled workflow, this might involve monitoring successful completions, exception rates, human intervention, processing costs, and failure patterns throughout rollout.<\/p>\n<p>The organization can then adjust the implementation before problems scale.<\/p>\n<p>An October 2026 article from the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tsia.com\/blog\/outcome-based-pricing\">Technology &amp; Services Industry Association (TSIA)<\/a> emphasizes that outcome-based pricing works best when results are measurable, attribution is clear, and the provider has sufficient control over delivery.<\/p>\n<p>These principles are equally useful when designing outcome-aligned engagements that do not use fully contingent pricing.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Why_Accountability_Must_Continue_Beyond_Go-Live\"><\/span>Why Accountability Must Continue Beyond Go-Live<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Software deployment is a milestone, not proof of sustained business value.<\/p>\n<p>Once an application enters production, the operating environment changes. Real users introduce unpredictable behavior, integrations evolve, and performance requirements become more demanding.<\/p>\n<p>An engagement that ends at deployment may leave the organization responsible for problems it has not prepared to manage.<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/smd-wp-website-media.s3.eu-west-3.amazonaws.com\/0565\/ChatGPT+Image+Oct+27%2C+2026%2C+07_59_55+PM-3.png\" \/><\/p>\n<h4>The Problem with Deliver-and-Disappear Models<\/h4>\n<p>Consider an enterprise application that launches successfully and meets every agreed functional acceptance test.<\/p>\n<p>Three months later, transaction volumes increase, an external integration changes, and users begin encountering intermittent failures.<\/p>\n<p>The implementation may have met its original delivery requirements.<\/p>\n<p>However, the business still needs monitoring, troubleshooting, corrective engineering, and decisions about future improvements.<\/p>\n<p>If operational ownership was not defined before go-live, those responsibilities can become fragmented.<\/p>\n<p>This creates a gap between successful software delivery and successful software operation.<\/p>\n<h4>From Software Deployment to Continuous Improvement<\/h4>\n<p>A stronger operating model establishes how production performance will be reviewed and improved.<\/p>\n<p>Depending on the system and agreement, ongoing responsibilities may include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Monitoring reliability and performance<\/li>\n<li>Managing incidents and service requests<\/li>\n<li>Resolving recurring defects<\/li>\n<li>Maintaining integrations<\/li>\n<li>Reviewing usage and operating costs<\/li>\n<li>Implementing approved enhancements<\/li>\n<li>Reporting against agreed business KPIs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Not every project requires the same level of managed services.<\/p>\n<p>A mature engineering organization may prefer to operate the application internally. Another company may require a delivery partner to maintain a broader scope of operational responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The important decision is to define who owns the software after launch and how continued success will be assessed.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"How_SmartDev_Connects_Engineering_Capacity_with_Delivery_Outcomes\"><\/span>How SmartDev Connects Engineering Capacity with Delivery Outcomes<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>SmartDev&#8217;s approach to software delivery recognizes that different business challenges require different forms of engineering engagement.<\/p>\n<p>Some organizations need additional engineering capacity within an established delivery model. Others need more complete responsibility for building, integrating, deploying, and operating software.<\/p>\n<p>Through <a href=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/solutions\/ai-native-software-development\/\">AI-Native Software Development<\/a>, SmartDev positions engineering around these different requirements, including AI-native development and engineering team extension.<\/p>\n<h4>AI-Native Engineering vs. Engineering Teams Extension<\/h4>\n<p>AI-native engineering is relevant when an organization needs a defined solution developed around its business requirements, technical constraints, and expected delivery results.<\/p>\n<p>Engineering team extension is more appropriate when the customer already controls product strategy and engineering execution but needs additional technical capacity.<\/p>\n<p>The distinction should be made during qualification.<\/p>\n<p>Before selecting a model, SmartDev and the customer need to establish what the organization wants to deliver, which responsibilities can be transferred, and which outcomes can be measured fairly.<\/p>\n<p>An outcome-driven approach does not require every engagement to use fixed-price or performance-based billing.<\/p>\n<p>It requires a clear relationship between the delivery model and the customer&#8217;s objectives.<\/p>\n<h4>Building, Running, and Improving Software<\/h4>\n<p>Software value depends on both implementation and the ability to sustain reliable operations.<\/p>\n<p>SmartDev&#8217;s AI-native software development positioning includes development, go-live, and ongoing managed services, with an emphasis on monitoring operational performance and reporting against meaningful results.<\/p>\n<p>This broader delivery perspective is particularly relevant for enterprise applications that depend on complex integrations, ongoing maintenance, or AI-enabled workflows.<\/p>\n<p>For such systems, delivery conversations should address operational ownership before implementation begins.<\/p>\n<p>That includes defining the transition to production, monitoring requirements, incident responsibilities, and the process for future improvements.<\/p>\n<h4>Results from a SmartDev Delivery Engagement<\/h4>\n<p>A published SmartDev case study, <a href=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/case-studies\/replacing-fragmented-manual-workflows-with-a-governed-ai-platform\/\">Replacing Fragmented Manual Workflows With a Governed AI Platform<\/a>, illustrates how technology delivery can be connected to measurable operational improvements.<\/p>\n<p>SmartDev worked with a Netherlands-based BFSI startup to replace fragmented manual processes and an underperforming financial advisory prototype.<\/p>\n<p>The solution involved a governed AI-powered platform combining structured knowledge, automated risk assessment, and controls designed to validate AI-generated responses.<\/p>\n<p>According to SmartDev&#8217;s published project summary, the engagement reported:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>50% faster risk assessment and recommendations<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>70% less manual compliance documentation<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>35% higher advisor engagement<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>These figures describe the reported results of that specific engagement. They should not be interpreted as guaranteed performance for other projects.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the case is the relationship between what was delivered and what changed operationally.<\/p>\n<p>Rather than evaluating the engagement solely by engineering effort or the number of features developed, the project can also be discussed in terms of faster assessment workflows, reduced documentation effort, and user engagement.<\/p>\n<p>For technology leaders, that is a more useful starting point for evaluating software investment.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion_Buy_the_Result_Not_Just_the_Resource\"><\/span>Conclusion: Buy the Result, Not Just the Resource<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The goal of software outsourcing should not be to maximize the number of developers assigned to a project.<\/p>\n<p>It should be to establish the capabilities, responsibilities, and delivery conditions required to achieve a meaningful result.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes that means expanding an existing engineering team. Sometimes it means appointing a delivery partner to take responsibility for a defined solution. In other situations, the priority is improving architecture, operational processes, or post-launch support before increasing development capacity.<\/p>\n<p>The appropriate model depends on the problem.<\/p>\n<p>What should remain consistent is the discipline of defining success before committing resources.<\/p>\n<p>If your organization is planning a software initiative or reconsidering its current outsourcing model, start by identifying the outcomes that matter, the constraints preventing progress, and the responsibilities your team wants to retain.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/contact-us\/\">Talk to SmartDev<\/a> about your engineering objectives and current delivery challenges. We can explore which engagement approach fits your requirements and where measurable accountability should begin.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Frequently_Asked_Questions\"><\/span>Frequently Asked Questions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<h4>1. What Is Outcome-Based Software Development?<\/h4>\n<p>Outcome-based software development is an approach that aligns engineering delivery with measurable business or operational results. Instead of evaluating success primarily through staffing levels or completed tasks, organizations assess outcomes such as reliability, processing efficiency, delivery predictability, or user adoption. The approach requires clear success criteria, reliable measurement, and agreed delivery responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h4>2. How Is Outcome-Based Delivery Different from Staff Augmentation?<\/h4>\n<p>Staff augmentation provides additional engineering professionals who typically work under the customer&#8217;s delivery management. Outcome-based delivery organizes an engagement around defined results and associated accountability. The models are not mutually exclusive: augmented teams can operate with outcome-oriented KPIs, while fully managed delivery arrangements may assign broader responsibility to the supplier.<\/p>\n<h4>3. What KPIs Should Enterprises Use to Measure Software Delivery?<\/h4>\n<p>Relevant software delivery KPIs include lead time, change failure rate, production defect frequency, service availability, recovery time, and milestone predictability. Business-facing metrics may include workflow completion, processing efficiency, and adoption. The best selection depends on the product&#8217;s objectives, operating environment, available data, and which results the delivery team can reasonably influence.<\/p>\n<h4>4. Is Outcome-Based Outsourcing More Cost-Effective?<\/h4>\n<p>Outcome-based outsourcing can improve cost visibility by connecting expenditure with measurable deliverables or operational improvements. However, it is not automatically less expensive than staff augmentation or time-and-materials engagements. Cost effectiveness depends on scope stability, risk allocation, measurement quality, provider control, and the total cost of building and operating the software.<\/p>\n<h4>5. When Should a Company Choose Engineering Team Extension?<\/h4>\n<p>Engineering team extension is appropriate when an organization has established product leadership, architecture ownership, delivery processes, and technical governance but needs additional skills or capacity. It is particularly suitable for evolving product roadmaps and ongoing development. A more outcome-managed delivery model may be preferable when the customer needs broader implementation accountability.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>TL;DR: More developers do not automatically translate into faster delivery, better software, or stronger business&#8230;<\/p>","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":42045,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[806,738],"tags":[773,717,391,810,807,808,811,809],"class_list":["post-42043","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-it-outsourcing","category-software-development","tag-ai-native-software-development","tag-engineering-team-extension","tag-it-outsourcing","tag-managed-software-services","tag-outcome-based-software-development","tag-outcome-driven-delivery","tag-software-delivery","tag-software-development-kpis"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.7 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"fr_FR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SmartDev\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@smartdevllc\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1672\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"941\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Giang Do Huong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@smartdevllc\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@smartdevllc\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u00c9crit par\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Giang Do Huong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Giang Do Huong\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/669d24656fd46704365689c44625eadd\"},\"headline\":\"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3149,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png\",\"keywords\":[\"AI-Native Software Development\",\"Engineering Team Extension\",\"IT Outsourcing\",\"Managed Software Services\",\"Outcome-Based Software Development\",\"Outcome-Driven Delivery\",\"Software Delivery\",\"Software Development KPIs\"],\"articleSection\":[\"IT Outsourcing\",\"Software Development\"],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/\",\"name\":\"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00\",\"description\":\"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png\",\"width\":1672,\"height\":941},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/outcome-based-software-development\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/\",\"name\":\"SmartDev\",\"description\":\"Al Powered Software Development\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"SmartDev\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"SmartDev\",\"alternateName\":\"SmartDev\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/04\\\/SMD-Logo-New-Main-scaled.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/04\\\/SMD-Logo-New-Main-scaled.png\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":550,\"caption\":\"SmartDev\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@smartdevllc\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/smartdevllc\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/4873071\\\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/669d24656fd46704365689c44625eadd\",\"name\":\"Giang Do Huong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Giang Do Huong\"},\"description\":\"As an enthusiast about strategy and sustainable development, she is driven by the intersection of creativity, consumer insight, and long-term value creation. With a strong interest in marketing and innovation, she is passionate about exploring how businesses can leverage technology to build meaningful and sustainable impact. Through her journey at SmartDev, she aspires to contribute to impactful, technology-driven solutions that not only support business growth but also create lasting value for society.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/smartdev.com\\\/fr\\\/author\\\/giang-dohuong\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev","description":"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/","og_locale":"fr_FR","og_type":"article","og_title":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev","og_description":"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.","og_url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/","og_site_name":"SmartDev","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@smartdevllc","article_published_time":"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1672,"height":941,"url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Giang Do Huong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@smartdevllc","twitter_site":"@smartdevllc","twitter_misc":{"\u00c9crit par":"Giang Do Huong","Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/"},"author":{"name":"Giang Do Huong","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/669d24656fd46704365689c44625eadd"},"headline":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes","datePublished":"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/"},"wordCount":3149,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png","keywords":["AI-Native Software Development","Engineering Team Extension","IT Outsourcing","Managed Software Services","Outcome-Based Software Development","Outcome-Driven Delivery","Software Delivery","Software Development KPIs"],"articleSection":["IT Outsourcing","Software Development"],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/","name":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes | SmartDev","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png","datePublished":"2026-10-27T13:06:25+00:00","description":"Learn why outcome-based software development prioritizes delivery results over headcount, and how to choose the right model.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Oct-27-2026-07_59_54-PM-2.png","width":1672,"height":941},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/outcome-based-software-development\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Stop Buying Headcount. Start Buying Outcomes"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/","name":"SmartDev","description":"D\u00e9veloppement de logiciels aliment\u00e9 par l&#039;IA","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#organization"},"alternateName":"SmartDev","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#organization","name":"SmartDev","alternateName":"SmartDev","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/SMD-Logo-New-Main-scaled.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/SMD-Logo-New-Main-scaled.png","width":2560,"height":550,"caption":"SmartDev"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@smartdevllc","https:\/\/x.com\/smartdevllc","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/4873071\/"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/669d24656fd46704365689c44625eadd","name":"Giang Do Huong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4a3fce111f92e5cc04cf41361929ac164f69dc03970176ef18ce7d20972dfeb9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Giang Do Huong"},"description":"As an enthusiast about strategy and sustainable development, she is driven by the intersection of creativity, consumer insight, and long-term value creation. With a strong interest in marketing and innovation, she is passionate about exploring how businesses can leverage technology to build meaningful and sustainable impact. Through her journey at SmartDev, she aspires to contribute to impactful, technology-driven solutions that not only support business growth but also create lasting value for society.","url":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/author\/giang-dohuong\/"}]}},"permalink_manager":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42043","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42043"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42043\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42046,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42043\/revisions\/42046"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/42045"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42043"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42043"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/smartdev.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42043"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}