We’ve been thinking about how to evaluate our migration options without spinning up a full engineering effort. The idea we’re exploring is having business users actually build and test migration workflows using a visual no-code builder, rather than having developers translate requirements into workflows.
The benefit is obvious in theory: business teams understand their own processes better than anyone. They can specify what they need without engineering as the intermediary. It’s faster iteration, fewer translation errors.
What I’m skeptical about is whether a visual builder can really handle the complexity of a migration workflow without you hitting walls where the builder just can’t do something, and you end up bringing in a developer anyway.
Also, I’m wondering about production readiness. Even if non-technical people can prototype workflows in a visual builder, does that mean the workflows are actually production-ready? Or is there still a “translation to production” phase where developers have to rebuild them properly?
One more thing: we’ve got some complex interdependencies between departments that don’t map cleanly to standard workflow patterns. I’m not sure how you’d model those in a visual builder without ending up in spaghetti logic.
Has anyone actually had non-developers prototype and deploy critical workflows using a visual builder? What was the gap between “works in the prototype” and “ready for production”?