A hospital wants a scheduling copilot that already books visits. No product on the shortlist enforces the hospital's local consent rule for minors. How should the architect close the gap?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You buy the truck that already hauls the load, and you fit the lock the dealer does not sell. You buy the scheduling copilot and build only the local consent rule. Rebuilding the whole booking flow spends the budget on a copy.
Full Explanation
Build, buy, or extend is chosen from the size of the gap. The scheduling products already book visits, and the only gap is a local consent rule for minors that none of them includes, so the hospital buys the copilot and builds that rule. A full replacement scheduling copilot rebuilds a booking flow the products already provide, which is custom work the gap does not justify. Dropping the consent rule makes the purchase fit by abandoning the requirement the privacy and clinical staff still have. A vendor slide that mentions consent is a claim in a presentation, not the hospital's rule running against a real minor's visit. Exam caveat: a small local rule can still be consequential, so the built piece needs the same review as any other consent control. Operational check: book a test visit that requires the local consent rule and confirm the purchased copilot handles the schedule while the hospital's rule blocks the booking until consent is recorded. Write the product, the consent condition, and the booking result on one test sheet, and repeat the test for an adult visit that should book without that consent stop.