3Advance

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
2010
Hourly Rates:
$100 - $149 / hr
Employees:
10 - 49
Avg. Project Cost:
$2,500,000+
Ratings:
4.1 6 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • UI-UX Design
  • Web Design

Industries Served

Fashion & Apparel Real Estate Automotive Government & Public Sector Healthcare Sports & Fitness

Where We Specialize

25% Software Development
Software Development 25%
AI Development 22%
IoT Development 18%
Bot Development 14%
Web Development 11%
Mobile App Development 7%
Phonegap 3%

Industry Expertise

Entertainment37% Logistics33% FinTech30%

Typical Project Size

40% Small Business
31% Enterprise
29% Midmarket Business

About

3Advance has been in business since 2010, delivering technology projects for clients. 3Advance focuses on Mobile App Development. With 10 - 49 people on staff, 3Advance can take on projects of varying size. Typical hourly rates run around $100 - $149 / hr/hr, with an average project cost near $10,000. Clients have rated 3Advance 5.0 out of 5 in 23 reviews. The team is based in Arlington, VA. Overall, 3Advance is one of the options worth shortlisting for a technology project.

3Advance Reviews

4.1 6 Reviews
Submit Review

Had something running in production for the board to see inside of two months

Willem Jansen / Chief Technology Officer | Jun 09, 2026

This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.

Project summary

Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AI & Machine Learning
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Aug 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Fashion & Apparel
Location:
Rotterdam, Netherlands

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Delta Tech BV has been operating in Fashion & Apparel for a while now, headquartered in Rotterdam, Netherlands. As Chief Technology Officer I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Fashion & Apparel segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the AI & Machine Learning changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was AI & Machine Learning, though their involvement grew to include technical consulting during discovery that meaningfully sharpened our own requirements. They also took full ownership of the third-party integration work, which had been a coordination headache on past projects, and just handled it themselves.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their AI & Machine Learning approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Fashion & Apparel — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious AI & Machine Learning program in Fashion & Apparel and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Compliance program landed on time and cleared the regulator without a single remediation note

Bianca Alvarado / Chief Product Officer | Jun 07, 2026

I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.

Project summary

Our agents were spending more time reconciling data across disconnected tools than actually talking to clients. We needed one platform to give them that time back.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 3.5
  • Project Cost 3.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Cybersecurity
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - May 2026
Business Type:
Real Estate
Location:
San Diego, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Lumen Media Collective is a Real Estate business headquartered in San Diego, USA. As Chief Product Officer I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our Cybersecurity capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly Cybersecurity, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Real Estate experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious Cybersecurity program in Real Estate and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Our distributed team has effectively adopted the virtual space as its default meeting room

Femke Visser / Head of Platform Engineering | Jun 05, 2026

Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.

Project summary

The shift to EVs created dealer network management needs our existing system was never designed for. A targeted rebuild was the path the leadership team had already agreed on.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AR/VR Development
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - May 2026
Business Type:
Automotive
Location:
The Hague, Netherlands

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Polder Digital BV, a growth-stage Automotive company based in The Hague, Netherlands. My role as Head of Platform Engineering covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our AR/VR Development capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full AR/VR Development lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Automotive space had used them for something similar in AR/VR Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, AR/VR Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious AR/VR Development program in Automotive and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Fast, accessible, responsive — every box checked, every deadline hit along the way

Marcus Teo / CTO | May 10, 2026

We handed this team an aggressive deadline, a genuinely complicated scope, and a client-side team on our end that was stretched thin and slow to respond at times. They handled all of it without complaint. When they needed something from us they asked precisely and on time. When they didn't, they just kept moving. The project still landed on schedule despite our side being the weaker link for a good chunk of it, which tells you something about how they operate under pressure.

Project summary

Cross-agency data sharing had been stuck for years because of incompatible systems. A secure integration layer was the prerequisite for nearly everything else on our roadmap.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 3.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Web Development
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Government & Public Sector
Location:
Singapore

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Sentosa Ventures Pte Ltd has been operating in Government & Public Sector for a while now, headquartered in Singapore. As CTO I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The Web Development investment we'd scheduled twelve months out suddenly needed to happen in six, and building it internally in that window wasn't realistic.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Web Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their Web Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Government & Public Sector — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

Built data foundations solid enough that we won't need to revisit them for years

Fiona McAllister / Chief Technology Officer | Feb 13, 2026

What actually moved the needle wasn't their ability to follow a spec — any competent team can do that. It was their willingness to push back when a requirement didn't make sense, explain clearly why, and help us decide on something better instead. That extra layer of judgment took the final product past what we'd actually asked for and closer to what we genuinely needed, which isn't always the same thing.

Project summary

The handoff between our clinic system and our patient app kept breaking in the same places. We needed a partner willing to own that integration end to end, not just patch it again.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 3.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Data & Analytics
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Jun 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Healthcare
Location:
Glasgow, UK

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Highland FinTech Ltd is a Healthcare business headquartered in Glasgow, UK. As Chief Technology Officer I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our Data & Analytics capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly Data & Analytics, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The questions they asked during the briefing stage told us most of what we needed to know. Vendors who ask sharp questions during sales tend to bring that same rigor into delivery, and that held up. The technical proposal had real substance, the team was senior from the start, and the pricing was straightforward.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Healthcare experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.

The rebuilt site went from something we apologized for to something our sales team leads with

Aoibhinn Molloy / Director of Product | Jan 03, 2026

I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.

Project summary

A previous project had worked fine in staging and fallen apart in production. We approached vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny as a direct result.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 3.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Web Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Sports & Fitness
Location:
Galway, Ireland

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Barrow Digital Ltd is a Sports & Fitness business headquartered in Galway, Ireland. As Director of Product I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Web Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their Web Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Sports & Fitness — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
On time and inside the approved budget. Their estimating was notably accurate — they'd broken the work down in enough detail during discovery that the forecast held up the whole way through, instead of drifting with every small change. We had exactly one change request, and it was for scope we added ourselves.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

3Advance typically covers the standard range of software development work — mobile apps, web platforms, custom internal tools, UI/UX design, cloud infrastructure, AI integrations, and larger enterprise builds. Its core focus areas include Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development.

What 3Advance charges comes down to a handful of variables — how complex the project is, the number of development hours involved, the tech stack required, team size, and which engagement model you pick. Based on available data, 3Advance's typical hourly rate is around $100 - $149.

The exact stack shifts by project, but 3Advance commonly works across things like React, Angular, Vue.js, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Flutter, React Native, native iOS and Android, and cloud platforms like AWS and Azure. For context, it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities, and it reports a team size of 10 - 49 professionals.

It depends heavily on scope. A lean MVP might be a matter of weeks, while a full enterprise system or a larger digital transformation project can stretch into months once you factor in development, testing, and deployment. With a team of 10 - 49 professionals, 3Advance can scale resources based on project urgency.

What tends to set 3Advance apart usually comes down to some mix of technical depth, relevant industry experience, how clients describe working with them, their development approach, communication habits, and whether they can actually deliver something that scales. Founded in 2010, the company has built a track record of delivering projects across various industries.

Most businesses reach 3Advance through its website, a direct email, or a contact form — any of which works for discussing what you need, booking an initial conversation, or asking for a rough estimate. For context, it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities, and it has been operating since 2010.

Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like 3Advance, where you get engineers working exclusively on your project as an extension of your in-house team rather than as a separate outsourced unit. For context, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities.

Most companies structured like 3Advance give you a choice between a fixed-price contract, a dedicated team arrangement, or time-and-materials billing, so you can pick whichever lines up with your budget and how well-defined your scope already is. For context, it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities, and it reports a team size of 10 - 49 professionals.

Modernizing legacy software is usually within scope for a firm like 3Advance — re-platforming, refactoring old code, and moving things onto current frameworks or cloud infrastructure without necessarily rebuilding everything from zero. For context, it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities, and its typical hourly rate is around $100 - $149.

3Advance generally runs something close to a standard structured process — requirements gathering, UI/UX design, development in agile sprints, QA testing along the way, deployment, and support once it's live. For context, it has experience across industries such as Mining & Metals, Human Resources, Food & Beverage, Logistics & Supply Chain, Information Technology and Energy & Utilities, and its typical hourly rate is around $100 - $149.
Get Listed