In general, when in-house capability doesn't exist, things are outsourced. But I don't think that comparison is entirely equivalent.
I think for software it's easier to specify requirements that more closely relate to goals. Then you pay for the complexity they entail. For instance, you can say I want to replace this form with the objective of eliminating paper and improving efficiency. The dev shop might charge you more than the market rate but they'll still have to deliver you something that's relatively close to what you imagined.
Furthermore, it would be in the interest of an honest dev shop to advise and build something really useful for the client so that they come back.
I think for software it's easier to specify requirements that more closely relate to goals. Then you pay for the complexity they entail. For instance, you can say I want to replace this form with the objective of eliminating paper and improving efficiency. The dev shop might charge you more than the market rate but they'll still have to deliver you something that's relatively close to what you imagined.
Furthermore, it would be in the interest of an honest dev shop to advise and build something really useful for the client so that they come back.