What this article covers
In a job interview, if you say:
I'm interested in companies that build their own products.
I want to work on an in-house product.
there's a pretty good chance the interviewer will come back with something like this:
Why an in-house product company?
Why your own product, rather than trading company sales, contract development, or consulting?
Do you just mean you want more autonomy?
If your answer is thin, it can come across like this:
Maybe you just don't know much about other jobs?
Maybe you're just attracted to the buzzword "in-house development"?
Maybe you just want to avoid working on-site at clients' offices or selling from a catalog?
This article walks through how to answer "Why in-house development?" so it doesn't sound shallow.
Here's the short version. Don't stop at:
I like in-house development.
Say something closer to this instead, and your answer gets a lot stronger:
I want to work somewhere I can keep picking up on customers' problems and how they actually use the product, and feed that back into our own product and how we run things.
Why "I like in-house development" tends to sound shallow
There's nothing wrong with the phrase "I like in-house development" itself.
The trouble is that, on its own, it's too broad.
People who say they want in-house development have all kinds of motives:
- I want to grow one product over the long term
- I want customer feedback to shape how the service improves
- I don't want to sell and walk away; I want to see customers actually adopt it after rollout
- I want to work with engineering, sales, and customer success to improve things
- I want to avoid contract development and on-site work at client offices
- I want to avoid catalog-style sales like at a trading company
- It just seems free and like I'd get a lot of autonomy
The ones near the top are solid motives.
The ones near the bottom are a bit risky in an interview.
That's because interviewers aren't only asking why you want to join an in-house product company. They're also checking:
What does this person actually want to do at a product company?
What kind of value can they create between customers and the product?
Do they understand how hard in-house development can be?
The short answer: reframe it like this
Here's the basic template for an interview:
What attracts me to in-house development isn't simply wanting to handle our own company's products. It's that I can keep track of customers' problems and how they use the product, and reflect that in product improvements and better operations.
I don't want to sell and move on. I want to look at how the product is used after rollout and where customers get stuck, and work with sales, customer success, and engineering to make the service something people use more.
A shorter version:
I want to work somewhere I can take customer feedback and feed it back into our own product and how we operate, rather than just collecting it.
An even shorter one:
I want to work where customer problems and product improvement are close together.
Said this way, you sound like you're looking at the substance of the work, not just the "in-house development" label.
How to answer when they ask "Why?"
In an interview, you'll almost certainly be asked "Why?"
So it's safest to prepare your answer in two layers from the start.
Layer 1: What draws you to in-house development
I'm drawn to being able to keep improving a single product and stay involved until customers are using it for the long term.
Layer 2: Why that fits what you want
I'm interested in more than one-off proposals or sales. I like working out where customers are actually struggling and turning that into better operations and a better service. At an in-house product company, I think it's easier to bring what you learn from customer contact back inside the company and take part in the improvement cycle.
Putting it together
What attracts me to in-house development is that I can keep improving one product and stay involved until customers are using it over the long term. I'm interested in more than one-off proposals or sales. I like working out where customers are actually struggling and turning that into better operations and a better service. At an in-house product company, I can bring what I learn from customer contact back inside the company and take part in the improvement cycle, and I think that fits what I want to do.
Answering this way makes you look much less like someone who "just wants autonomy."
How is this different from catalog-style sales at a trading company?
Sales at a Japanese trading company (shosha) is, at its core, a job where you sit between buyers and sellers of raw materials and products. You balance supply and demand, price, quantity, delivery dates, credit, logistics, and contracts.
Of course trading company sales involves making proposals too.
But in the more catalog-style versions of the job, the value tends to center on things like:
- Which product to choose
- What price you can offer
- When you can deliver
- How you coordinate with suppliers
- How you keep the relationship with the customer going
At an in-house B2B product company (one that builds software or products sold to other businesses), the value tends to center on things like:
- How the product fits into the customer's work
- Whether it's actually being used after rollout
- Where users are getting stuck
- Which features, workflows, or explanations need to change
- How to feed customer feedback back into product improvements
So the difference looks like this:
| Job | How it creates value |
|---|---|
| Trading company / catalog-style sales | Choose from products that already exist, and deliver them by adjusting price, delivery dates, and terms |
| In-house B2B product company | Fit your own product into the customer's work and keep improving it so it keeps getting used |
That doesn't make trading company sales a bad job.
It suits people who are strong in product knowledge, supplier coordination, price negotiation, delivery management, relationship building, and troubleshooting.
In-house B2B suits people interested in customer problems, understanding how a customer's work runs, rollout support, getting people to use the product, pulling in colleagues across the company, and product improvement.
If they ask "Why not trading company sales?"
For this question, you need to answer without putting trading company sales down.
Here's a bad way to answer:
I think trading company sales is just selling from a catalog, so I'm not really interested.
That's risky.
It sounds like you don't understand the job.
Here's a good way to answer:
I understand that trading company sales has real value, like product knowledge, coordinating with suppliers, and negotiating price and delivery. But what interests me more isn't only choosing and delivering products. It's keeping an eye on how customers use things and what problems they have, and reflecting that in our own product and how we operate. That's why I'm drawn to in-house product companies, where customer contact and product improvement are close together.
This way you respect the other job and still make your own priorities clear.
How is this different from consulting? "If you like proposals, why not consulting?"
You might also be asked: "If you like pulling people in and making proposals, wouldn't consulting be fine?"
It's a very natural question.
Consulting means sorting out a client's problems, proposing solutions, and sometimes supporting the execution as well.
So it suits people who enjoy finding problems, analysis, putting things into documents, proposals, and driving projects.
But it has a different focus from in-house B2B.
| Job | Where the focus is |
|---|---|
| Consulting | Analyze the client company's problems, then design solutions and support their execution |
| In-house B2B product company | Keep solving customers' problems through your own product |
In consulting, solving the problem itself is the core.
In in-house B2B, the core is delivering value continuously through the product.
Using that difference, you can answer in an interview like this:
I'm interested in work like consulting, where you sort out problems and make proposals. But what attracts me more is not stopping at the proposal. It's checking afterward whether the product is really being used and has taken hold, and continuing to improve the product and how it's run. That's why I'm drawn to in-house product companies, where solving problems and improving the product are close together.
This doesn't dismiss consulting, and it still gives a reason for choosing in-house development.
If they ask "Do you just want autonomy?"
When you say you like in-house development, some interviewers may think:
Is it just about wanting autonomy?
Do they just think it looks free?
Do they just hate contract work and working at client sites?
In that case, it's better not to lead with autonomy.
Here's a bad way to answer:
I think in-house development gives you more autonomy.
That makes it sound like you just want to do whatever you like.
Here's a good way to answer:
Autonomy itself isn't really the goal. What attracts me is that, once I understand the customer's problem, I can work with people across the company to improve things. Of course you need to think and act on your own, but I don't mean I want to do whatever I like by myself. I mean I want to take responsibility for an improvement cycle that leads to value for the customer.
The key is to not say:
I want autonomy
but instead:
I want to be part of an improvement cycle that leads to value for customers
If they ask "Will you just throw all customer requests over to engineering?"
What matters at an in-house product company is not passing customer requests straight to the developers.
Customers can't always put their real problem into words.
For example, even if a customer says:
Please add more of this button
the real problem might be:
- The steps are hard to follow
- The initial setup is complicated
- The permission settings don't match how they work
- There aren't enough materials to explain it inside their company
- Their workflow wasn't well organized in the first place
So in an interview, it's strong to say something like this:
I don't want to just hand customer feedback over as a feature request. I want to understand the work problem and usage situation behind it, and then separate what can be solved by changing how they operate, what can be solved with a better explanation, and what really needs a product improvement.
This is a very important way of thinking in in-house B2B.
Examples by role
If you're coming from sales
What attracts me to in-house development is that I can see not only the proposal, but whether the product is actually being used after rollout and has taken hold in the customer's work. I want to understand the customer's problem and, together with customer success and engineering inside the company, make proposals that deliver value over the long term.
If you're coming from customer success
I'm drawn to being able to help customers get up to speed quickly after they adopt our product, and to keep supporting them as they use it more and make it stick. I want to take the places where customers stumble and the requests they have, sort them out, and connect them to onboarding, adoption support, and product feedback.
If you're coming from implementation support or implementation project management
I'm interested in understanding a customer's workflow and designing how our product should be rolled out so people on the ground will really use it. I don't want to just install a system. I want to include operations design and coordinating the people involved, so that it takes hold after rollout.
If you're coming from Product Ops or business planning
I'm interested in work that connects the information we get from customer contact to product improvements and better internal operations. Rather than stopping at handling individual requests, I'm drawn to an environment where I can sort out the common problems and improve them as a system.
If you're inexperienced or early in your career
Right now I don't have much experience that directly involves improving a product. But I'm interested in work where you understand customers' problems, pass them on accurately inside the company, and lead to better ways of using the product. First I'd like to deepen my understanding of customers and the product, and later get involved in improvement proposals and adoption support too.
Answer templates for 30 seconds, 1 minute, and 2 minutes
30-second version
What attracts me to in-house development is that I can keep watching customers' problems and how they use the product, and reflect that in product and operational improvements. I don't want to sell and move on. I want to look at how the product is being used after rollout, and work with sales, customer success, and engineering to make the service something people use more.
1-minute version
I'm drawn to in-house development because one product lets me create value for customers over the long term. I think work like trading company sales, where you choose products and adjust price and delivery dates to get them to the customer, has real value too. But what interests me more is understanding how the product is actually used after rollout and where customers are struggling, and connecting that to improvements in the product and how it's run. I want to work where customer contact and the improvement cycle are close together, which is why I'm applying to in-house product companies.
2-minute version
I'm drawn to in-house product companies because customer problems and product improvement are close together. It's not simply that I want to handle our own company's products. I'm attracted to being able to keep watching how customers actually use the product, where they get stuck, and what support or improvements would help them get more value from it.
I understand that in trading company sales, the value centers on product knowledge, coordination with suppliers, and negotiating price and delivery. And in consulting, the strength is in sorting out a client's problems, proposing solutions, and supporting their execution. Both are important jobs, but what interests me more is not stopping at the proposal or the sale. It's continuing to watch how customers use one product, and improving it together with sales, customer success, and engineering inside the company.
That's why I want to work in an in-house B2B product environment, where what I learn from customer contact can be brought back into improving the product and how it's run.
Bad answers
Bad answer 1: "It seems free"
I think in-house development is freer.
Saying it seems free, or that it seems like you'd get autonomy, tends to sound shallow.
Reframe it like this:
I want to take responsibility for being part of an improvement cycle that leads to value for customers.
Bad answer 2: "I don't like contract work or client sites"
I don't like contract development or working at client sites, so I prefer in-house development.
If all you give is what you want to avoid, it doesn't make a positive reason for applying.
Reframe it like this:
I'm attracted to being able to stay involved with one product over time and improve it while watching how customers use it.
Bad answer 3: "I'd get to work on the upstream stuff"
I think in-house development lets me work on the upstream stages.
"Upstream" (the early stages of a project, like planning and requirements) is a handy word, but it's abstract.
Reframe it like this:
I want to be part of work that sorts out customers' problems and carries them through rollout, adoption, and improvement.
Bad answer 4: "I want to handle our own products"
I think it would be more fun to work with our own company's products.
On its own, this sounds like you just love the product.
Reframe it like this:
Because it's our own product, I'm attracted to being able to keep collecting customer feedback and reflect it in improvements.
What interviewers are looking for
More than the phrase "I like in-house development" itself, interviewers are looking at the following:
- Do you understand what the work at an in-house product company is?
- Do you understand how it differs from trading company sales, contract development, and consulting?
- Do you think in a way that doesn't just swallow customer requests whole?
- Are you willing to pull in engineering, sales, customer success, and others?
- Are you interested in customer value and improvement, rather than autonomy?
- Are you ready to stick with one product for a long time?
- Instead of "it seems free" or "it seems easy," do you also understand how hard it is?
What matters most is this view:
Take customer feedback, sort it out, and turn it into improvements
It isn't just listening. It isn't just selling. It isn't just throwing things over to engineering.
What matters is shaping improvements while looking at the customer's work, how it's used on the ground, internal priorities, and the product's constraints.
Who suits in-house B2B, and who doesn't
Who it suits
- You want to keep improving one product over a long time
- You enjoy understanding customers' work
- You're interested in how the product is used after rollout
- You can stand between sales, customer success, and engineering
- You can sort out customer requests and set priorities
- You don't want to sell and walk away; you want to see adoption and real use
- You can catch small points of friction and turn them into improvements
Who it doesn't suit
- You mainly want to handle lots of new products
- You prefer negotiating price and coordinating delivery dates
- You want to push customer requests through as they are
- You'd get bored staying with one product for a long time
- You're not good at coordinating with engineering or internal circumstances
- You only want to chase numbers
- You're choosing it only because it seems free or easy
In-house development is not an easy job.
In fact, because the product is your own company's, there are things you can't run away from.
- Requests keep coming in from customers
- Development resources are short
- Sales wants to sell
- Customer success wants to prevent cancellations
- The product side wants to narrow down priorities
- Customers want improvements right away
The job is to endure being caught in the middle of all this while turning things into actual improvements.
That's exactly why, in an interview, saying
I want to be part of an improvement cycle that leads to value for customers
is stronger than saying "I want autonomy."
A final sample interview answer
Here's a version you can use almost as-is in a real interview.
What attracts me to in-house development is that customer problems and product improvement are close together. It's not simply that I want to handle our own company's products. I'm drawn to being able to keep understanding how customers actually use the product and where they're struggling, and to reflect that in improvements to operations and to the product.
I understand that trading company sales has real importance, creating value through product knowledge, coordination with suppliers, and negotiating price and delivery. But what interests me more is not only delivering products, but creating a situation where the product keeps being used after rollout.
I'm also interested in work like consulting, where you sort out problems and make proposals. But what attracts me to in-house B2B is that I can go beyond the proposal, watch how the product is used and whether it takes hold afterward, and keep improving a single product.
So I want to work in an environment where I can bring what I learn from customer contact back into improvements, working with sales, customer success, engineering, and others.
This answer covers all of the following:
- Why in-house development
- How it differs from trading company sales
- How it differs from consulting
- That it isn't just about wanting autonomy
- Your interest in customer problems and product improvement
Summary
"I like in-house development" on its own sounds a little shallow.
In an interview, it's safest to reframe it like this:
I want to work somewhere I can keep picking up on customers' problems and how they use the product, and feed that back into our own product and how we run things.
And if they dig deeper, organize your answer like this:
- Trading company sales is work that creates value through products, price, delivery dates, and coordination with suppliers
- Consulting is work that analyzes a client's problems, proposes solutions, and supports their execution
- In-house B2B is work that creates continuing value for customers through your own product
What matters is not ranking one job above another.
Trading company sales, consulting, and in-house development each have their own value.
With that as a base, if you can say
I'm interested in work that picks up customers' problems and brings them back into the product and how it's run.
your reason for choosing in-house development gets much stronger.
References (5)
- Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Occupational Information Site "job tag": "Trading Company Sales"
- Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Occupational Information Site "job tag": "IT Consultant"
- Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Occupational Information Site "job tag": "Consulting Sales (IT)"
- Explainer articles on customer success onboarding, adoption, churn, and product feedback
- Career explainer articles on the differences between in-house product companies and system integrators or contract development
