Sibers

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
1998
Hourly Rates:
$50 - $99 / hr
Employees:
50 - 249
Avg. Project Cost:
$25,000+
Ratings:
4.6 8 Reviews

Services

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

Industries Served

Nonprofit & NGO Automotive Manufacturing Retail & E-commerce Advertising & Marketing Agriculture Construction Food & Beverage

Where We Specialize

19% Testing Services
Testing Services 19%
IT Services 18%
Software Development 17%
Mobile App Development 13%
UI/UX 12%
Web Development 11%
E-commerce Development 8%
Web Design 2%

Industry Expertise

Real Estate100%

Typical Project Size

60% Midmarket Business
23% Enterprise
17% Small Business

About

Sibers has been in business since 1998, delivering technology projects for clients. Their core services include Mobile App Development and Custom Software Development. The company operates with a team of 50 - 249 professionals. Typical hourly rates run around $50 - $99/hr, with an average project cost near $30,000. Overall, Sibers is one of the options worth shortlisting for a technology project.

Sibers Reviews

4.6 8 Reviews
Submit Review

Multi-region uptime has held above 99.9 percent since the day we went live

Morgan Ellsworth / Head of Digital Health | Jun 11, 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 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Cloud Services
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Nonprofit & NGO
Location:
Phoenix, USA

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Cedarview Health Systems is a Nonprofit & NGO business headquartered in Phoenix, USA. As Head of Digital Health 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Nonprofit & NGO, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Cloud Services 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?
The core of it was Cloud 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?
A peer in the Nonprofit & NGO space had used them for something similar in Cloud Services and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Cloud Services 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 Nonprofit & NGO 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?
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 Cloud Services 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 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?
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 Nonprofit & NGO looking for real Cloud Services depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Their architecture review steered us away from a vendor decision we would have regretted

Min-Jun Kang / VP of Engineering | Jun 01, 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 connected vehicle platform needed to handle telemetry from a growing EV fleet while also managing over-the-air update rollouts, and nothing off the shelf handled both well.

  • Overall Rating 5.0
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 5.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IT Consulting
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Sep 2025 - May 2026
Business Type:
Automotive
Location:
Busan, South Korea

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Han River Digital Corp, a growth-stage Automotive company based in Busan, South Korea. My role as VP of 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Automotive, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The IT Consulting 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?
The scope ran the full IT Consulting 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 IT Consulting and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, IT Consulting 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?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
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?
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?
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 Automotive network, both times to people facing IT Consulting 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.

Every conversion metric on the platform moved in the right direction after this redesign

Airi Kobayashi / Head of Product Development | Apr 28, 2026

Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.

Project summary

Our lean manufacturing push needed real-time OEE data at the line level, and our existing systems could only produce it through hours of manual spreadsheet work each week.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
UI/UX Design
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Sep 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Manufacturing
Location:
Nagoya, Japan

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Rising Sun Commerce KK has been operating in Manufacturing for a while now, headquartered in Nagoya, Japan. As Head of Product 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?
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 UI/UX Design, 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 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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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 UI/UX Design depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Rare skill: explained serious findings clearly to people with zero security background

Rashid Al-Marzouqi / Chief Technology Officer | Apr 18, 2026

Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.

Project summary

Our funnel data made it obvious exactly where we were losing customers, and it wasn't subtle. We needed a platform capable of the experience our competitors were already delivering.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 5.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Cybersecurity
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Retail & E-commerce
Location:
Sharjah, UAE

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Beacon Digital Ventures, a growth-stage Retail & E-commerce company based in Sharjah, UAE. My role as Chief Technology Officer 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Retail & E-commerce, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Cybersecurity 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 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?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
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?
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?
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 Retail & E-commerce network, both times to people facing Cybersecurity 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.

They built what we actually needed, which wasn't quite what we originally asked for

Ananya Raman / Director of Engineering | Mar 19, 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 campaign workflow had sprawled across a dozen disconnected tools with constant manual reconciliation. It was slowing us down and introducing errors we couldn't afford.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Software Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Jun 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Advertising & Marketing
Location:
Kochi, India

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Director of Engineering at Bridgeway Ventures I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Advertising & Marketing operations out of Kochi, India. 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?
Regulation in our Advertising & Marketing segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Software Development 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 Software 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 Advertising & Marketing space had used them for something similar in Software Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Software 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?
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?
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?
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?
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, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Advertising & Marketing network, both times to people facing Software 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.

The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved

Amal Al-Hosani / Head of Digital Strategy | Mar 11, 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

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 4.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Low-Code / No-Code Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Jun 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Agriculture
Location:
Dubai, UAE

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Pearl Coast FinTech, a growth-stage Agriculture company based in Dubai, UAE. My role as Head of Digital Strategy 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Agriculture, 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?
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?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Dubai, UAE and the delivery team. Written updates were consistent and specific, anything needing a decision got same-day turnaround, and nothing slipped through the cracks across the whole engagement.
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?
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?
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 Agriculture network, both times to people facing Low-Code / No-Code 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.

Went live on the date we agreed to, which anyone who's done an ERP rollout knows is rare

Angus Fairbanks / Chief Digital Officer | Feb 19, 2026

Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.

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 4.5
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
ERP Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Construction
Location:
Brisbane, Australia

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Digital Officer at Coral Coast Technology I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Construction operations out of Brisbane, Australia. 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 ERP 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 ERP 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?
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?
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?
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?
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 Construction network, both times to people facing ERP 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

Kenji Watanabe / Director of IT Strategy | Jan 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 product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
DevOps Services
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Aug 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Food & Beverage
Location:
Yokohama, Japan

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Director of IT Strategy at Kirin Digital KK I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Food & Beverage operations out of Yokohama, Japan. 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?
Regulation in our Food & Beverage 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?
Mainly DevOps Services, 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?
A peer in the Food & Beverage space had used them for something similar in DevOps Services and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, DevOps Services 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?
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?
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 DevOps Services 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?
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?
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 Food & Beverage looking for real DevOps Services depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

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

What Sibers 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, Sibers's typical hourly rate is around $50 - $99.

Sibers has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Travel & Hospitality, Agriculture, Aerospace & Defense, Nonprofit & NGO, Food & Beverage and Financial Services.

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 50 - 249 professionals, Sibers can scale resources based on project urgency.

That depends on where Sibers is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, it has experience across industries such as Travel & Hospitality, Agriculture, Aerospace & Defense, Nonprofit & NGO, Food & Beverage and Financial Services, and its typical hourly rate is around $50 - $99.

Plenty of modern software teams, Sibers 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 Travel & Hospitality, Agriculture, Aerospace & Defense, Nonprofit & NGO, Food & Beverage and Financial Services, and it has been operating since 1998.

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

It's a common line of work for a company like Sibers — multi-tenant architecture, subscription billing hooked up properly, and cloud-native deployment built for a product meant to scale as a service rather than a one-off build. For context, its listed capabilities span Custom Software Development, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 50 - 249 professionals.

Sibers 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 Travel & Hospitality, Agriculture, Aerospace & Defense, Nonprofit & NGO, Food & Beverage and Financial Services, and its listed capabilities span Custom Software Development, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design and Web Development.

The most reliable route is giving Sibers a clear, specific brief up front — through their website form, a direct email, or a call — since a vague ask tends to get a vague answer back, while a concrete one usually gets a proper estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span Custom Software Development, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design and Web Development, and it has experience across industries such as Travel & Hospitality, Agriculture, Aerospace & Defense, Nonprofit & NGO, Food & Beverage and Financial Services.
Get Listed