The roadmap isn't the problem. The capacity is.
You already have a live product, a process that works and people who know it well. What you don't have is enough of them this quarter. We add senior design and engineering inside your team - your board, your repo, your review - and step back out when the hiring catches up.
How it lands
- Your board, your sprint, your definition of done
- Your repo and your branching model - every PR reviewed by your engineers
- Named people in your standup, not a rotating bench
48h
From first call to a written scope and a capacity plan
5 days
Typical time from signed scope to a first PR in your repo
4h+
Overlap with your working day, every day, in your channels
30 days
Notice to scale down - month to month, no annual lock-in
The quarter before a team calls us.
None of these mean the team is underperforming. They mean the work arrived faster than the headcount did.
The roadmap is committed, the capacity isn't
Everything on the board was promised to someone - a customer, a board deck, a renewal. The team is already full, and the only lever left is cutting scope on work that was sold as done.
Two open roles, four months, no signature
The headcount was approved, the pipeline is thin, and the good candidates take counter-offers. Even the ones who sign are three months from being useful, and the quarter doesn't wait for onboarding.
Design finishes, engineering starts, repeat
Handoffs sit in a queue, states nobody specified come back as questions, and a two-week feature spends a week in the gap between the two crafts. The waiting is the schedule, not the building.
There's one area nobody volunteers for
Billing, the old admin, the reporting layer, the integration written in a hurry two years ago. It works, it's load-bearing, and every estimate that touches it doubles because nobody wants to own the blast radius.
The last contractors cost more review than they saved
Enormous pull requests, patterns from someone else's codebase, and a senior engineer pulled off roadmap work to review it. The capacity arrived and then quietly left again through the review queue.
A date exists that the plan never got a vote on
A conference, a renewal, a customer contract with a go-live clause. The date was set by the business, the estimate came afterwards, and the gap between them is now your problem to close.
Three shapes. Pick the one that fits.
Which one you need depends on where the queue actually forms - in engineering, in one deferred surface, or in front of design. Teams often start with one and move to another.
Tell us where the queue is- Model 012 to 6 months, rolling
An embedded squad inside your process
You need more of the team you already have, not a separate vendor running in parallel. We join your board, your standup and your repo, and take work off the same backlog everyone else does.
- Named people, not a rotating bench - the same faces in your standup every day
- Your tools and your rituals: Linear or Jira, your sprint cadence, your definition of done
- Small pull requests into your branching model, reviewed and approved by your engineers
- Capacity agreed a month at a time and changed at a sprint boundary, never mid-flight
How SaaS Development worksYou end up with
Throughput that shows up on your board, under your process and your review.
- Model 024 to 12 weeks
One surface, owned end to end
There's a slab of work the team keeps deferring - billing, onboarding, the admin console, a customer portal, the reporting layer. We take the whole thing against a written scope and a fixed price, so it stops competing with the roadmap.
- A paid scoping pass on the existing code first, so the estimate accounts for what's already there
- A written scope naming the interfaces, the edge cases and the explicit not-now list
- Built behind a flag where it makes sense, so it merges continuously rather than as one release
- Tests, migration notes and a walkthrough with whoever inherits it on your side
How SaaS Development worksYou end up with
The thing nobody had room for - shipped, documented and handed over.
- Model 033 to 8 weeks
A design and front-end surge
The backend team is fine. The bottleneck is interface: a redesign that keeps slipping, a component library half-migrated, marketing pages queued behind product work. We take the front of the product while your engineers stay on the parts only they can do.
- An audit of the current components and where the design has drifted away from them
- A design system your team keeps building in - tokens, states and documented usage
- Production front-end in your framework, accessible and tested down to 320px
- Marketing pages and product UI kept in one visual language rather than two
How Website Development worksYou end up with
The interface backlog cleared, and a system your team ships against afterwards.
Outsiders in a codebase you maintain.
You've been burned by agency capacity that arrived as review debt. Here's exactly how this works differently - and how you stop it if it doesn't.
We work inside your process, not beside it
Your ticketing, your sprint length, your definition of done, your release train. Nothing new for your team to adopt and no separate status meeting - if it isn't visible on your board, it isn't progress.
Your engineers approve every merge
Small pull requests against your branching model, your linting and your CI, described for a reviewer who wasn't in the room. Nothing lands because we said it was ready.
Your conventions win, every time
We write in the patterns already in the repo, including the ones we'd argue with, and we don't quietly introduce a state library or a new folder structure. Refactors get proposed, discussed and ticketed like anyone else's.
Access scoped to the work
Least privilege from day one, your SSO and your device rules, and seeded or masked data for local work rather than a production dump. We'll sign your NDA, DPA and security addendum before access is granted.
Capacity you can turn down
Month to month with 30 days' notice, no annual commitment and no minimum term. If a hire lands or the quarter changes shape, you scale us back at a sprint boundary instead of arguing with a contract.
The knowledge stays when we leave
Decisions recorded where your team already reads them, README and runbook updates shipped in the same PR as the change, and a recorded walkthrough per surface. Handover is written as we go, not assembled in the last week.
From call to first merged PR.
The whole point is that this ramp is shorter than a hire's. Nothing below is a commitment until the capacity plan is signed.
A call with whoever owns the roadmap
Forty-five minutes on the backlog, the constraint you're actually hitting and the shape of the team today. We'll say plainly if this reads as a hiring problem rather than a capacity one.
A capacity plan and a written scope
Normally inside 48 hours: who joins, at what allocation, against which slice of the backlog, at what monthly or fixed cost. You approve a document rather than a conversation.
Access, environment, first pull request
Paperwork and accounts on day one, the repo running locally on day two, and something small and real in review before the week is out - chosen to exercise your pipeline rather than to impress you.
In the rituals, on the board
Standup, planning, retro and your review queue like anyone else on the team. The first meaningful increment reaches staging and gets demoed by the person who built it.
A rhythm, and a monthly look at it
Sprints running, a written note each month on what shipped and where the capacity actually went, and an honest read on whether you still need us at this allocation.
What procurement and engineering both ask.
Anything about a specific service lives on the FAQ, and how a monthly or fixed number is arrived at is on the pricing page.
Send us the slice you keep deferring.Get a capacity plan in 48 hours.
A few tickets, a Figma link or a paragraph about the quarter is enough to start. Worst case you get a free second opinion on whether this is a capacity problem or a scoping one.