Putti

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
2010
Hourly Rates:
$150 - $199 / hr
Employees:
10 - 49
Avg. Project Cost:
$25,000+
Ratings:
4.4 8 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • Web Design

Industries Served

Manufacturing Automotive Mining & Metals Construction Gaming & Gambling Food & Beverage

Where We Specialize

21% Virtual Reality
Virtual Reality 21%
Software Development 16%
Bot Development 14%
Mobile App Development 12%
Web Development 11%
AI Development 10%
Wearable 10%
IoT Development 6%

Industry Expertise

Retail100%

Typical Project Size

60% Enterprise
29% Midmarket Business
11% Small Business

About

Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider Putti. Their core services include Mobile App Development. With 10 - 49 people on staff, Putti can take on projects of varying size. Typical hourly rates run around $150 - $199 / hr/hr, with an average project cost near $25,000. Putti holds a 5.0-star rating across 1 client reviews. Putti operates out of Beach, New Zealand. These details offer a useful starting point when evaluating Putti.

Putti Reviews

4.4 8 Reviews
Submit Review

Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout

Bartosz Nowicki / Head of Development | Jun 01, 2026

The easiest thing to praise is the technical output itself — solid test coverage, a deployment pipeline that just works, documentation that people actually reference instead of ignoring. But what I keep coming back to is the number of conversations we haven't had to have since launch. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-mortems about what went sideways. That absence is really the whole pitch, if you ask me.

Project summary

Unplanned downtime had become our biggest single cost line, and our own data suggested predictive maintenance could fix most of it — if we had the infrastructure to act on the signal.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Low-Code / No-Code Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Oct 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Manufacturing
Location:
Kraków, Poland

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Wełna Software Sp zoo has been operating in Manufacturing for a while now, headquartered in Kraków, Poland. As Head of Development 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Manufacturing, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Low-Code / No-Code Development piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly Low-Code / No-Code Development, 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 Manufacturing 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?
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?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Low-Code / No-Code Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
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?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Manufacturing looking for real Low-Code / No-Code Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

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

Margaux Lefèvre / Head of Digital Products | Apr 30, 2026

Five months post-launch, we're running at roughly double the transaction volume we'd specified in the original scope document, and the platform hasn't needed a single structural change to handle it. That's the real tell for whether a team designed for what you told them versus what you were actually going to need. We're now scoping a second phase and I expect this to be a multi-year relationship at this point.

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 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Web Development
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Automotive
Location:
Nice, France

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Head of Digital Products at Horizon Digital SAS I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Automotive operations out of Nice, France. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our Web 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 core of it was Web Development, 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?
A peer in the Automotive space had used them for something similar in Web Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Web 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Automotive 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?
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, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Automotive network, both times to people facing Web Development problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.

This engagement shifted our culture as much as it shifted our tooling

Matilda Osborne / Head of Engineering | Apr 03, 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

This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
DevOps Services
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Mining & Metals
Location:
Adelaide, Australia

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Redgum Data Solutions has been operating in Mining & Metals for a while now, headquartered in Adelaide, Australia. As Head of Engineering 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 DevOps Services 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?
The core of it was DevOps Services, 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 DevOps Services approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Mining & Metals — 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?
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?
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?
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.

The observability stack caught three incidents before a single user reported anything

Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Mar 30, 2026

We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.

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 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
DevOps Services
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Oct 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Construction
Location:
Salt Lake City, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Summit Line Logistics has been operating in Construction for a while now, headquartered in Salt Lake City, USA. As VP of Operations Technology 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 Construction segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the DevOps Services 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 scope ran the full DevOps Services 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?
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 Construction 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?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
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.

Scaled from a ten-unit pilot to full fleet deployment without a single architectural rework

Anjali Raghunathan / VP of Data Science | Mar 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

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 3.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IoT Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Gaming & Gambling
Location:
Seattle, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Data Science at Clearwave Analytics Inc I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Gaming & Gambling operations out of Seattle, USA. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
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?
Mainly IoT Development, 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?
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 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 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.

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

Wei Ling Ong / VP of Engineering | Mar 04, 2026

We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.

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 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Data & Analytics
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Construction
Location:
Singapore

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Lion City Technologies Pte Ltd is a Construction business headquartered in Singapore. As VP of Engineering 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?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The Data & Analytics 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 Data & Analytics 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 Data & Analytics approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Construction — 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?
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 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?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Construction network, both times to people facing Data & Analytics problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.

The research surfaced friction points we'd stopped noticing because they'd always been there

Anton Berggren / Chief Technology Officer | Feb 12, 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

Unplanned downtime had become our biggest single cost line, and our own data suggested predictive maintenance could fix most of it — if we had the infrastructure to act on the signal.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
UI/UX Design
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Mar 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Manufacturing
Location:
Malmö, Sweden

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Baltic Cloud AB has been operating in Manufacturing for a while now, headquartered in Malmö, Sweden. 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?
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?
Mainly UI/UX Design, 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 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 UI/UX Design approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Manufacturing — 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Manufacturing 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?
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?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Manufacturing network, both times to people facing UI/UX Design problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.

Test automation got adopted by developers as a genuine tool, not a box-ticking exercise

Julian Ashworth / Head of Digital Strategy | Jan 03, 2026

We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.

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 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Quality Assurance & Testing
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Jan 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Food & Beverage
Location:
London, UK

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Kingswood Consulting Ltd has been operating in Food & Beverage for a while now, headquartered in London, UK. As Head of Digital Strategy 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?
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?
The core of it was Quality Assurance & Testing, 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?
A peer in the Food & Beverage space had used them for something similar in Quality Assurance & Testing and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Quality Assurance & Testing 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Food & Beverage 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?
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?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Quality Assurance & Testing work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
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 Quality Assurance & Testing program in Food & Beverage and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

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

Putti 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, Web Design and Web Development.

Generally, yes — companies like Putti tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 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 2 - 9 professionals, Putti can scale resources based on project urgency.

What tends to set Putti 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.

Like most established software teams, Putti typically sticks around post-launch for ongoing maintenance — bug fixes, performance tuning, security patching, new feature work, and general technical support. For context, it has experience across industries such as Agriculture, Manufacturing, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Legal Services and Events & Event Management, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

When you're weighing up a software partner such as Putti, it's worth looking past the pitch and checking the portfolio, what past clients say, relevant industry background, technical range, how they communicate, pricing structure, project management style, and what support looks like after launch. For context, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like Putti, 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, Web Design and Web Development, and it has been operating since 2010.

Plenty of modern software teams, Putti included, now build real AI and machine learning features — chatbots, predictive models, computer vision, and automation that goes beyond simple rule-based scripts. For context, it has experience across industries such as Agriculture, Manufacturing, Energy & Utilities, Logistics & Supply Chain, Legal Services and Events & Event Management, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 professionals.

Putti isn't necessarily limited to one region and may take on clients across several countries, depending on market demand and business partnerships.
Get Listed