Loading page…
An AI assistant is planned. Until it is genuinely useful we would rather point you at the page that actually answers your question.
A dedicated team is engineers assigned to your work on an ongoing basis, working within your process rather than delivering against a fixed scope. You direct priorities; we provide the people and the engineering practice.
It differs from project work in where control sits. A fixed-scope project has an agreed deliverable and a defined end. A dedicated team has a capacity commitment and priorities you can change between sprints — which suits products that evolve rather than complete.
Hiring takes time you sometimes do not have. A senior engineer can be months from search to productive, longer in competitive markets. A dedicated team closes a capacity gap in weeks, which matters when the constraint is a deadline rather than headcount budget.
It also suits uncertain scope. When you know the direction but not the exact feature list, a fixed-scope contract creates friction — every change becomes a variation. A capacity arrangement absorbs that naturally.
The honest trade-off: this is more expensive per hour than a permanent hire and works best where continuity is valued. It is not a way to reduce cost per head.
Our approach
Our engineers work in your tooling. Your repositories, your board, your review process, your standup. Teams that work separately and integrate periodically produce integration problems and a knowledge gap — the value comes from being genuinely embedded.
We keep the same people on your work. Rotating engineers destroys context, and context is most of what makes a team effective after month two. If someone must change, we overlap them deliberately rather than swapping mid-sprint.
We write things down as a matter of course. Architecture decisions, runbooks and code comments assume the reader may not be us. That protects you if the engagement ends and reduces how much sits only in one person's head.
Capabilities
Frontend, backend or both, matched to the gap in your team rather than a generic profile.
Mobile, DevOps, data or AI expertise added for a phase without a permanent hire.
Design, engineering and QA as a unit where you need delivery capability rather than individuals.
Senior engineers who can set architectural direction and review work, not only implement.
A few hours of daily overlap with your working day for standups, reviews and pairing.
Documentation and pairing so capability stays with you when the engagement ends.
Stack
Process
Understanding what your team is missing — a skill, capacity, or leadership — since each implies a different person.
Proposing specific engineers with their experience, for you to interview and approve.
Access, context and a first task chosen to build understanding rather than to look productive.
Working in your process with the same visibility and accountability as your own engineers.
Periodic check-ins on whether the arrangement is working, including whether it should change.
Documentation and handover planned before the engagement ends, not after notice is given.
Use cases
Where the roadmap exceeds what the current team can deliver in the time available.
Mobile, DevOps or AI expertise needed for a phase but not permanently.
Maintaining momentum while a permanent search runs, without pausing the roadmap.
A separate team for a new initiative without disrupting work on the existing product.
Choosing an approach
These suit different situations. Choosing the wrong one produces friction throughout the engagement.
| Model | Suits | Requires from you |
|---|---|---|
| Dedicated team | Evolving scope, ongoing product work, capacity gaps | Someone to set priorities and make decisions regularly |
| Fixed-scope project | A well-defined deliverable with a clear end point | Scope agreed upfront; changes handled as variations |
Outcomes
FAQ
Related