4 min read
A pragmatic framework to composable commerce adoption
Composable commerce projects frequently become overly complex, leading to missed objectives and unnecessary costs. At Vercel, we take a no-nonsense approach to composable commerce that's solely focused on business outcomes. Architecture should serve the business, not the other way around. Ivory tower architectures disconnected from clear business goals inevitably lead to projects plagued by runaway costs. Here are five truths we stand by when it comes to composable commerce:
Truth #1: Focus on the desired outcomes
There are typically three reasons you want to switch to composable commerce:
Frontend focus: Delivering personalized user experiences quickly and efficiently to increase revenue
Integration focus: Integrating specialized tools to accurately measure and improve key business metrics like customer acquisition, retention, and returns
Backend focus: Optimizing backend processes such as fulfillment and inventory management to accelerate operational performance
If you're coming from a monolithic solution, only implement the minimum necessary changes to achieve one of these core outcomes. Additional work is often redundant, wastes resources, delays impact, and risks becoming obsolete as business priorities shift.
Truth #2: Keep your monolith—just make it your backend
If your primary goals are enhancing the frontend experience (frontend focus) or integrating specialized tools (integration focus), retain your monolithic platform initially. Particularly for projects with an integration focus, keeping the monolith as-is and treating it purely as an API backend is the recommended first step.
You're essentially shifting from a single monolithic system to a decoupled architecture with two parts: your existing monolith (now serving purely as an API layer), and a new headless frontend. Most importantly, you’re not immediately migrating to a new composable commerce backend. The monolith continues to serve as the source of truth.
This incremental approach offers several key benefits:
Higher velocity:
Deploying your frontend separately allows for quicker builds and iterations
Sharply scoped projects let you realize value quickly
Lower risk:
Existing backend processes remain untouched, avoiding unnecessary disruptions
You don’t alter components irrelevant to your immediate goals
Non-technical teams (marketing, merchandising) can continue business as usual without learning new systems
By taking an incremental path focused on your most pressing needs, you mitigate risks while still unlocking the architectural flexibility to drive future enhancements efficiently.
Truth #3: Frontend projects can be low effort
If your objective is integrating specialized tools (integration focus) or optimizing backend operations (backend focus), don’t invest significant effort into redesigning the user experience. Migrating to modern frontend technologies offers inherent benefits but should remain secondary.
"Low effort" doesn’t mean sacrificing quality—it means focusing frontend changes strictly on what's essential for backend or integration improvements. Redesigning while migrating will increase scope and delay progress. Leverage AI-assisted tooling to efficiently reproduce the existing user experience in the new headless architecture. This allows you to migrate quickly, preserving UX quality without unnecessary overhead. Even substantial migrations with unchanged UX can typically be completed within weeks following this lean approach.
If optimizing backend processes is your sole objective, consider fully decoupling from the monolith using an absolute bare-bones frontend initially. Once decoupled, you can then progressively replace the monolith with your preferred composable backend.
When enhancing the frontend experience is a priority (frontend focus), you can still adopt an incremental approach. Update only the user flows or pages directly tied to your most immediate business needs, while continuing to leverage the monolith for everything else.
Truth #4: You probably don't need an integration layer or middleware
Modern frontend frameworks like Next.js can often serve effectively as your integration layer, making middleware unnecessary in most scenarios. Unless your future plans explicitly involve multiple backend replacements, middleware typically adds unnecessary overhead that delays realizing business impact.
Middleware may occasionally be warranted in highly complex, multi-backend situations. Carefully evaluate your long-term architectural plans—often you'll find middleware creates complexity without proportional benefits.
Truth #5: Simplify and reduce
Prioritize software solutions directly aligned with specific business needs. Favor simplicity and flexibility over complex integrations. AI-driven development has substantially lowered the cost of custom solutions, making in-house development feasible even for smaller teams, reducing dependency on external vendors.
If choosing vendors, prioritize those with open APIs and flexible SDKs. Open APIs empower adaptability to your evolving business needs rather than constraining you to rigid product roadmaps.
Key takeaways
Architectural decisions should always serve your core objectives, not the other way around. The key to a successful composable commerce strategy is to maintain sharp focus on desired business outcomes. Rather than getting bogged down in architectural complexities, take an iterative approach by doing the smallest project possible to achieve your specific goals.
Adopt incremental, agile approaches narrowly scoped to immediate goals rather than expansive transformations
Emphasize simplicity and flexibility, avoiding unnecessary dependencies and complexity
Leverage modern tools (like Next.js and AI-driven solutions) to reduce complexity, accelerate projects, and deliver outcomes faster
By adhering to this no-nonsense approach, your composable commerce strategy becomes efficient, risk-mitigated, and sharply aligned to delivering immediate tangible business impact.