How should you choose an offshore development company? I'll share my honest take on how to identify a partner you won't regret.
I've spoken to a few companies, but they all say the same thing.
This is something I often hear from business owners looking for an offshore development partner.
We can cut costs, our quality is high, we provide Japanese language support—no matter which company's website you look at, they all say similar things. I can't tell the difference. That's why I can't make a decision.
Today, I'm going to talk about the honest criteria for evaluating a potential partner.
First, let's set aside the advice to not choose based on price alone.
The advice not to choose based on price has been repeated ad nauseam. Many people already know this.
But in reality, budgets are finite. Cost is an important decision-making factor. I believe telling people to ignore price is irresponsible advice.
What matters is choosing based on price plus something else. Choosing based on price alone leads to failure. However, if the costs are the same, you just need to have the eye to discern what makes them different.
Evaluation point 1: Is there a Japanese project manager?
The most common failure in offshore development is a breakdown in communication.
Different cultures, different languages, different business customs. When these three factors overlap and you communicate directly with overseas engineers, a gap will inevitably emerge somewhere.
Whether or not there is a Japanese project manager is a question of who will absorb these gaps.
A question to ask: Will a representative who can communicate in Japanese be stationed on the project? Is that person Japanese?
There is a huge difference between saying we have Nepali staff who can handle Japanese and saying a Japanese project manager will manage the entire project. You should choose the latter.
Evaluation point 2: Will they work with you on requirements gathering?
A company that says please send us the specifications and a company that says let's create the specifications together have fundamentally different stances.
Many startups do not have perfect specifications from the start. Even if they have an image of what they want to build, the details are decided through discussion.
Whether a company is willing to accompany you through that process is the criterion for judging whether they can become a long-term partner.
A question to ask: Can I consult with you from the stage where the specifications are not yet finalized? Can you provide support for requirements gathering?
If the answer you get is we can provide a quote once the specifications are ready, be careful.
Evaluation Point 3: "Are they willing to talk about past failures?"
This is a surprisingly important point.
Every company will tell you about their success stories. However, a company that honestly discusses their failures and trouble cases is one you can trust.
There is no such thing as an offshore development company that never fails. The issue is not "whether they failed," but "how they responded when they failed" and "what they learned from that experience."
Rather than a company that says, "We have never had any major trouble," a company that says, "We had this kind of trouble, and this is how we handled it," is actually more trustworthy.
Question to ask: "Have you ever had trouble with a project in the past? How did you handle it?"
Evaluation Point 4: "Are they willing to tell you their team's turnover rate?"
A subtly scary thing about offshore development is engineers changing in the middle of a project.
When the assigned engineer changes, handover costs arise. It takes time to understand the background of the code. Quality drops. In the worst case, the project stops.
As an indicator to measure team stability, turnover rate is extremely effective.
Question to ask: "What is the annual turnover rate of your engineering team?"
Companies that cannot answer, or companies that just say "it's low" without providing numbers, should be treated with caution. In the case of Last Partner, we can immediately answer that it is 8% or less.
Evaluation Point 5: "Is the contract type flexible?"
There are two main types of contracts for offshore development.
Fixed-price contract: A contract to have deliverables submitted. You order, "Please build this feature." Because the scope is fixed, additional costs are likely to occur.
Lab-type (quasi-mandate) contract: A contract to secure engineer man-hours. This is suitable for development where requirements change easily, such as for startups.
Companies that say, "We only handle fixed-price contracts," are often not suitable for startups. It is important to confirm whether they can handle lab-type contracts.
Question to ask: "Do you support lab-type contracts? How do you handle it if specifications change in the middle of the month?"
Finally: Look at the "on-site team," not just the "sales representative"
Be careful with companies where the only people you meet in meetings are "sales representatives."
Will they set up a meeting with the engineers and PMs who will actually be in charge of development before you place an order? Can they show you their office or development environment (online is also acceptable)?
A company that allows you to confirm 'who you will be working with' in advance is a trustworthy partner.
At Last Partner, a Japanese PM attends from the initial business meeting, and we set up online meetings with the Kathmandu team as needed. We accept consultations with the stance that 'if you meet them and it doesn't feel like a good fit, you are free to decline.'
About Last Partner Co., Ltd.
Last Partner is a company that provides offshore development utilizing Nepalese engineers.
✅ Owns an in-house development center and Japanese language school in Nepal
✅ Japanese PM manages the entire project and acts as a bridge
✅ Achieves approximately 60% cost reduction compared to domestic development
✅ Specializes in business systems and web development
📩 Start with a free consultation
🌐 https://lastpartner.jp/
✉️ info@lastpartner.jp
Please feel free to contact us!