Our finance and operations teams want to own more of the workflow automation process during our migration. The pitch for no-code builders is that non-technical people can build and test workflows, which would theoretically free up our engineering team for the complex integration work.
But in reality, I’m wondering if that’s true or if we end up with business teams creating things that engineers have to rebuild because they don’t follow proper error handling, logging, or scalability patterns.
We’re trying to decide whether to upskill our operations team on a no-code builder and let them prototype workflows independently, or if that just creates more work downstream. Have teams actually managed to let non-technical people own workflow creation during a migration, or does it consistently require engineering oversight?
Also, if it does work, what does that actually save? Is it just timeline, or do you get other benefits like operations teams understanding the automation better? I’m trying to build a realistic picture of what citizen developer participation actually looks like.