Enterprise is often used to mean expensive, and the genuine differences are specific: the system has to fit into an existing landscape rather than stand alone, identity and access come from elsewhere, everything is audited, and the people who approve the work are not the people who will use it. Each of those changes how a project should be run.
In custom enterprise software development services, the integration surface is the project
Enterprise systems rarely stand alone: identity, finance, human resources, data warehouse and half a dozen line of business systems all expect to exchange data. Every one is owned by another team with its own priorities and release calendar, which makes the critical path political as much as technical. Get the integration inventory written down with a named owner for each, and get those owners to agree dates before the plan is committed.
Identity, access and audit are not features
Single sign on against the corporate directory, roles that map to how the organisation actually works, and an audit trail that survives scrutiny are assumed rather than requested, and they are expensive to add late. Build them first. Where regulated data is involved the requirements are explicit, for example the technical safeguards at 45 CFR 164.312 covering access control, audit controls, integrity, authentication and transmission security, and the programme elements at 16 CFR 314.4.
The approval chain shapes how you should deliver
When approvers are not users, demonstrations drift towards what impresses a steering committee rather than what helps the people doing the work. Counter it deliberately: put actual users in front of working software regularly, report on their outcomes rather than on milestones, and give the project a written definition of the problem it solves so scope requests can be tested against it. Enterprise projects fail slowly, by accumulating requirements nobody needed.
Buy the ability to maintain it without the custom enterprise software development company
Enterprise engagements produce systems that outlive the relationship that built them, so require documentation written for a successor, infrastructure described in code in your repository, and a handover test where your own team builds and deploys. Require an express written copyright assignment, since under 17 USC 101 commissioned software is not automatically a work made for hire. These are ordinary terms and the time to agree them is before the work starts.
Questions people ask about enterprise software development
What actually makes enterprise custom software development different?
Integration into an existing landscape, identity and access supplied from elsewhere, everything audited, and approvers who are not users. Each of those changes the plan more than the size of the codebase does.
What is the most common cause of delay?
Integrations owned by other teams with their own priorities and release calendars. The critical path is as political as it is technical, so get named owners and agreed dates before committing to a plan.
How do we avoid building the wrong thing?
Put actual users in front of working software regularly rather than demonstrating to a steering committee, report on user outcomes rather than milestones, and hold a written definition of the problem so scope requests can be tested against it.