Creating business cases isn’t just a finance job anymore. If you’re an engineer moving closer to product roles or collaborating with product and strategy teams, you’ll quickly realize that your ability to contribute to business cases will either unlock your influence or hold you back.
I’ve lived both sides of the story. I started in engineering and made the shift into product and commercial strategy. And what I saw, firsthand, was that engineers often struggle with business cases for reasons that have nothing to do with talent and everything to do with mindset. Here’s what you need to know.
1. Engineering is about accuracy. Business is about direction.
In engineering, 100% accuracy is the standard. You can’t design a product that “mostly” works. Everything has to be bulletproof. That mindset works brilliantly for technical design, but it can be a blocker in business.
Business cases are never perfect. You’ll rarely have 100% of the information. You need to be able to work with ~70% of the facts, make smart assumptions, and push forward. That’s not laziness. That’s practicality.
I’ve seen this problem play out in real life. One of the worst business cases I ever saw was created by a very senior engineer. The level of technical detail was overwhelming in his spreadsheet. Almost every network component was listed. Everything was accounted for. And that’s exactly what made it unreadable and impractical.
Business stakeholders struggled to see the bigger picture. It was all over the place. Too many cost lines, too many revenue streams, too many rows and columns. The entire thing collapsed under the weight of unnecessary precision.
The truth is: if you want to create a compelling business case, you need to be able to see the bigger picture and group things. So, you need to simplify. You need a clear narrative that connects the problem, the opportunity, and the financial impact. That’s what business and finance teams need to see.
2. Features are not benefits. And benefits are not commercial value.
Another common misconception engineers have when contributing to business cases is assuming that technical benefits are self-explanatory.
For example, improving network efficiency, using a proprietary RF link, compressing video content, or enhancing service quality. Those are technical achievements. But they’re not the outcome. They’re not the business value.
A business case is a financial document. If you’re presenting a feature, you need to go all the way to the commercial impact. How does it affect churn? How does it increase ARPU? How does it save OPEX or delay CAPEX? That’s the language of business cases.
You need to complete the story. Features are part of the “how,” but business value is the “why.” And unless you take the reader all the way to the financial outcome, the case doesn’t land.
3. Stop going bottom-up. Start going top-down.
If you’re an RF engineer or solution architect looking to get better at business cases, this is the first shift I’d ask you to make.
Engineers naturally gravitate toward bottom-up logic. They start with the details: components, costs, traffic, network design. But that’s not the right starting point for a business case. Always start top-down.
Begin with the value. What are we trying to achieve? What’s the commercial impact we’re targeting? Then work your way down to the detail. Only after you’ve clarified the big picture should you bring in the supporting numbers.
There are two types of productisation approaches that can impact your business cases: greenfield ideas and retrofit ideas. In a greenfield case (brand-new idea), you have to go top-down because there is no bottom-up yet. But even for retrofit cases (e.g., improving an existing service), starting from the value and working you way down is the only way to maintain clarity and focus.
4. Don’t hide behind jargon. Speak in plain English.
When engineers collaborate with product or finance teams, they sometimes use technical jargon either assuming everyone understands them, or as a defense mechanism, especially if they feel out of their depth on the commercial side.
I’ve seen this behavior over and over again. It’s not intentional. It’s human.
But here’s the thing: great solution architects and engineers don’t do that. They speak in plain English because their priority is for business to understand their solution rather than trying to convince themselves “I am a really good architect, you know.” They start with the business problem. Then they show how the solution connects to it, in the simplest possible language.
Remember: product managers and business owners are looking to solve business problems. Finance teams are looking to quantify them. If your explanation doesn’t connect clearly to either, the message is lost. Clarity always wins.
5. Don’t obsess over financial jargon. Focus on the full picture.
One approach I see engineers use when trying to “learn business” is assuming that financial metrics are the only priority. They sometimes overcompensate by excessively using terms like NPV, IRR, payback, thinking that mastering these calculations will somehow make their business case more convincing.
It doesn’t work that way.
You don’t need to become a finance expert and more importantly you shouldn’t because that’s the job of a finance manager. You need to understand the bigger picture, the revenue and cost models with absolute clarity. You need to know how a product or solution actually makes money and what costs it drives.
You need to link the problem to the solution and demonstrate that through a revenue model and a cost model. You need to understand why the EBITDA matters. Why direct revenue needs to be separated. Why certain costs are allocated the way they are.
That’s what matters. The formulas in Excel? Anyone can learn those. That’s not the differentiator. The value is in understanding the logic behind those numbers and what they say about the business.
6. Learn from someone who’s made the transition
This is why I created the Commsbrief Business Case Training. I’ve seen firsthand the difference it makes when engineers learn to think commercially without losing their technical strengths.
I’ve stripped out the fluff in my training courses. No endless theory. No unnecessary jargon. Just real-world examples, practical logic, and the kind of Excel walkthroughs I wish someone had shown me when I made the transition from RF engineering to product management.
If you’re serious about understanding how business cases actually work, from revenues to cost allocation to investment logic, this will accelerate your journey.
I’ve designed the training with all kinds of business stakeholders in mind, including engineers.
→ Explore the full Business Case Training Hub here:
commsbrief.com/business-case-training-hub
The shift from engineering to business thinking isn’t about abandoning your technical strengths. Your technical strength is your superpower. What you need is to use that knowledge on the business side to complete the full picture with the commercial perspective. It’s about adding a new lens that makes your technical expertise even more valuable. Master this, and you’ll find doors opening that you didn’t even know existed.
