You need people who can write code, and you need them now. Hiring in-house takes months and it is not always the right move. Team augmentation with us means adding senior engineers to your development team. They work the same hours as your team, in your repository, with access to your systems from day one.
Team augmentation, also called staff augmentation, means adding outside engineering capacity to your company without going through an in-house hire. The engineers work on your project, with your tools and your backlog if that is what you want, and you pay a clear monthly fee instead of taking on payroll, recruiting and severance.
And you stay in charge. Work happens in your repository, with access to your systems, and decisions are documented as they are made, where your team can find them. Each engineer also has a team and a named lead behind them, following up with you.
It is the natural answer when a technical role has been open for months, when workload spikes and the deadline cannot move, or when the project does not yet justify a team of your own.
There are two ways to grow your development team with us, and the choice matters. In the first, team augmentation in the strict sense, our engineers work under your direction. In the second, closer to classic outsourcing, we take on the team and the technical direction.
Our engineers join your team and work under your direction. Your meetings, your repository, your process. You set priorities and we are accountable for the quality and continuity of the team. This is the option when you already have a technical team and need more capacity.
We bring the team and the technical direction, and we deliver against goals agreed with you. This is the option when you have no technical team of your own, or you prefer to delegate running it. If you have a fixed-scope project with a start and an end, the turnkey model of custom software development probably fits better. If what you want is technical judgment a few hours a month, with no team executing, that is what our technology consulting covers.
On the first call we will tell you which of the two fits your situation, and also if neither does.
The engineer knows the context, uses the tools your team already uses, and can be held accountable like anyone else on the team.
Our developer outsourcing comes with one rule. The engineer whose resume you approve and whose interview you run is the engineer who works on your project.
Backend, frontend and full stack development on mainstream technologies.
Engineers with years of experience building and maintaining systems in production.
You read the resume, you interview the engineer, and they only start once you sign off. If something stops fitting once work is under way, we address it early and find the solution that causes the least disruption to the project.
A low bid wins on the rate every time. The useful question is what the working, shipped version of the work ends up costing. Here is the whole comparison.
| Aspect | Lowest bid | A senior team |
|---|---|---|
| Hourly rate | Wins, and it is not close | Higher |
| Who writes the code | Often not the person on the resume you read | The engineer you interviewed |
| Turnover mid project | Common, and you onboard the replacement | A named team with a lead accountable for it |
| Hours you overlap | A short window, when there is one | The same hours as your team |
| Management hours you put in | Plenty, and none of them show up on an invoice | Few, because the team runs itself |
| Rework | The line nobody quotes you | Seniority keeps it down |
| Where the work lives | Their repository, their tooling, their standards | Your repository, your access, from day one |
| Cost of finished work | Follows from everything above | Agreed in writing, start to finish |
| Pick it when | The rate is the only number that matters | The result and your own hours both matter |
If the last row puts you in the left column, go with the low bid. The right column is our ground, and we would rather say so here than on the third call.
We define with you what you actually need, which role, how many people and from when. The proposal lists the roles, the allocation and the monthly price in writing.
We put the engineers in front of you and you interview them. The engineers you interview are the engineers who join your team.
The engagement starts with clear access, context and objectives for the first two weeks.
Your tools, your repository and your meetings if it is team extension, or ours with agreed deliveries if it is a managed team. Progress stays visible to you throughout.
We go over performance, workload and what is worth adjusting, in both directions. That conversation is on the calendar every month.
You grow, reduce or finish with the agreed notice period, and at the end there is a documented handover. Scaling down is as straightforward as scaling up.
Three things set the price: the seniority of each engineer, how much of their time you need, and the model you pick. All three go in the proposal in writing, with the start date.
To compare properly, put the full cost of the alternative next to it. An open technical role carries the cost of recruiting, the hours spent running interviews and, above all, the cost of projects sitting idle while the position remains open. What you are really paying for is speed.
If your stack is on this list, an engineer can be productive in your codebase in the first week rather than the first month.
The call usually comes from a company with a product team already shipping and a hole in it. Product and platform work for SaaS companies, storefronts and the integrations behind them for ecommerce, dispatch and tracking for logistics, shop floor and ERP work for manufacturers, and rollouts across sites for multi-location operators.
Illustrative, not case studies. They are recognizable all the same.
01Situation
A backend role has been posted for six months. Two offers fell through and the roadmap has stopped moving.
What happens
A senior engineer starts and the roadmap moves again, while the search for the permanent hire carries on without the pressure.
02Situation
A good in-house team lands a large piece of work with a date nobody can move.
What happens
Two engineers join for the months of the peak. When it ships the team goes back to its own size, with no layoffs on anyone's conscience.
03Situation
A company with no engineers of its own needs its platform to keep changing every month, and has no intention of building a department to do it.
What happens
A managed team takes it on, with deliveries agreed up front and one person you call about all of it.
Named people, a resume you can check, and nobody swapped out after the contract is signed.
Work happens in your repository, with access to your systems, and decisions get documented where your team will find them. We work so that you can do without us.
Colleagues to pull in and a named lead who answers for the work, so a hard problem does not stall on one person's calendar.
Allocation, monthly invoicing and the notice period, all in writing. And if hiring in-house is the better move for your company, we will say that.
We define the engineer or team you need, put candidates in front of you to interview, and once you approve they join your project with access and clear objectives. You pay a monthly fee agreed in writing, reviewed every month, with the freedom to scale up, scale down or end on the agreed notice.
Yes. Staff augmentation and team augmentation describe the same thing: outside engineers who join your team and work under your direction. What matters more than the label is which of our two models you pick, team extension or managed team.
We define the role with you, send resumes, and you run the interviews. The engineer starts once you approve, and the start date goes in writing in the proposal, so you have a date before you commit.
Yes. You review the engineer’s actual resume and interview them before making a decision. Nobody starts until you approve them, and the engineer you approve is the one who joins your project.
Each engineer works the hours set in the contract, full time or part time. A full-time engineer is on your project the way someone on your payroll would be, in your meetings and your sprint planning, and that commitment is in writing.
We address it early, which is what the monthly review is for. Sometimes adjusting how we work together is enough. Sometimes the right call is to replace the engineer, with an orderly handover so the project keeps moving. Replacement terms are set in the contract.
They are on our team, not freelancers found for the job. You sign one contract with us, and employment and payroll sit on our side. The people are named, and a lead is accountable for them.
You do. The project-specific code and documentation we create for you belong to you, as defined in the contract. You work in your own repository, with access to your systems from day one, so the work is in your hands from the first commit.
Yes, and we sign yours. Send us the agreement you use with your own team and we work under it. Everyone on our side who touches your project works under the same terms.
A monthly fee, agreed in writing and invoiced once a month. We invoice in the currency that suits you, and we fit your accounts payable process, purchase orders and supplier portal included.
You give the agreed notice and we run a documented handover, to your team or to the provider you choose. The knowledge is already in-house, because the work happened in your repository with decisions documented as they were made.
In three things. Each engineer has a named lead who follows up with you every month. We work with senior engineers, and the one you interview is the one who works. And the exit terms are as clear as the entry terms.
Reinforcing a team for three months and filling a permanent role are two different jobs. Tell us what you have in place, how you work and what you need. We reply within one to two business days to set up a first call.
Let’s talk about your project
