R/GA vs Doberman: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Doberman (3.8/5) edges ahead of R/GA (3.7/5) overall. Doberman is the better choice for Nordic/European enterprises, service design backed by EY network. R/GA is the stronger option for global brands, product design bundled with brand strategy. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
R/GA vs Doberman: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | R/GA | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1977 | 1998 |
| HQ | New York City, NY, USA | Stockholm, Sweden (also Oslo and Copenhagen) |
| Team size | ~2,000 | 100+ (within EY's global network) |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Fuses product design with marketing and brand strategy for large platforms, now operating independently for the first time in over two decades | Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition |
| Pricing model | Project-based, retainer for ongoing programs | Enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, After Effects | Figma, Miro, Adobe Creative Suite |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
R/GA vs Doberman: overview
R/GA
R/GA has run out of New York since 1977, expanding to ten countries with offices from Austin to Singapore. Interpublic Group owned it for 23 years until March 2025, when R/GA completed an independent buyout backed by private equity firm Truelink Capital. What hasn't changed across that ownership history is the pitch: product design fused with marketing and brand strategy, aimed at large consumer and enterprise platforms rather than single-scope product work.
Doberman
Doberman started in Stockholm in 1998 and grew into a 100+ person design and innovation firm with studios in Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhagen before EY acquired a majority stake, folding it into EY's much larger consulting network. Its client list spans Google, Swedish banks, and public-sector organizations, and Doberman positions itself around service and product innovation rather than pure visual design — helping organizations design new services and customer experiences, not just interfaces.
Services and capabilities: R/GA vs Doberman
| Capability | R/GA | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: R/GA vs Doberman
| Framework / platform | R/GA | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | ✓ |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: R/GA vs Doberman
| Criterion | R/GA | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: R/GA vs Doberman
| Dimension | R/GA | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
| Best use cases | Consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch, Enterprise digital product with a marketing or campaign component | Service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization, Product innovation engagement backed by a large consulting network |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
R/GA vs Doberman: pros and cons
| R/GA | |
|---|---|
| + | Combines product design with marketing and brand strategy under one roof |
| + | Ten-country footprint spans North America, Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific |
| + | Nearly five decades of enterprise brand relationships and case studies |
| + | Independently owned again since its March 2025 buyout, after 23 years inside Interpublic Group |
| - | The 2025 ownership transition to a private-equity-backed independent structure is recent enough to ask about directly |
| - | Marketing-first positioning means less pure product-design specialization than boutiques built around design alone |
| - | Pricing and scale suit large-brand budgets more than early-stage product teams |
| Doberman | |
|---|---|
| + | Nearly three decades of continuous operation since 1998, longer than most European boutiques on this list |
| + | Three-city Nordic studio footprint (Stockholm, Oslo, Copenhagen) |
| + | EY's majority-stake backing provides access to a much larger global consulting network |
| + | Client list includes Google alongside major Swedish banks and public-sector organizations |
| - | Majority acquired by EY, so clients are hiring into a large consulting network rather than an independent boutique |
| - | Nordic-centered office footprint may mean less overlap with US or APAC business hours |
| - | Team size figures blend Doberman's own ~100 staff with EY's much larger combined network, making direct capacity comparison harder |
Who should choose R/GA?
A typical fit: consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch.
Fuses product design with marketing and brand strategy for large platforms, now operating independently for the first time in over two decades. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment.
Who should choose Doberman?
A typical fit: service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization.
Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation.
Decision matrix: R/GA vs Doberman
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | R/GA |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: R/GA (Not published) vs Doberman (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | R/GA |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: R/GA vs Doberman
| Use case | R/GA fit | Doberman fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch | Strong | Limited | R/GA |
| Enterprise digital product with a marketing or campaign component | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Product innovation engagement backed by a large consulting network | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: R/GA vs Doberman
Doberman (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. Nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition.
R/GA (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need enterprise digital product with a marketing or campaign component. If your situation matches that, R/GA is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
R/GA vs Doberman FAQ
Is R/GA better than Doberman?
Doberman (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. R/GA's strongest advantage: combines product design with marketing and brand strategy under one roof. Doberman's strongest advantage: nearly three decades of continuous operation since 1998, longer than most European boutiques on this list.
How do R/GA and Doberman differ in pricing?
R/GA uses project-based, retainer for ongoing programs pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Doberman uses enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: R/GA or Doberman?
R/GA is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each agency before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between R/GA and Doberman?
R/GA's primary differentiator is: fuses product design with marketing and brand strategy for large platforms, now operating independently for the first time in over two decades. Doberman's primary differentiator is: nearly three decades of Nordic service-and-product-design work, now backed by EY's global consulting network after its majority-stake acquisition. They also differ in team size (~2,000 vs 100+ (within EY's global network)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.