Work & Co vs Doberman: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Work & Co (3.8/5) edges ahead of Doberman (3.8/5) overall. Work & Co is the better choice for premium brands, design paired with production-grade engineering. Doberman is the stronger option for Nordic/European enterprises, service design backed by EY network. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Work & Co vs Doberman: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 1998 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | Stockholm, Sweden (also Oslo and Copenhagen) |
| Team size | 425+ | 100+ (within EY's global network) |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outsizes its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model | 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 | Fixed project, dedicated team | Enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, React, Next.js | Figma, Miro, Adobe Creative Suite |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
Work & Co vs Doberman: overview
Work & Co
Five co-founders — Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo — launched Work & Co from Dumbo, Brooklyn in May 2013. The studio has since added offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe, but headcount (roughly 425) hasn't grown to match its client list: Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, and Disney have all hired this team. Its engineering-heavy delivery model — design and front-end build under one roof — is a large part of why. Work & Co joined Accenture Song in 2023.
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: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Capability | Work & Co | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | ✓ | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | N/A | ✓ |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Criterion | Work & Co | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Dimension | Work & Co | Doberman |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering | 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 |
Work & Co vs Doberman: pros and cons
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to a ~425-person studio |
| + | Engineering-heavy delivery keeps design and build under one roof, reducing hand-off risk |
| + | Offices across the US, Europe, and Latin America support genuine multi-region delivery |
| + | Consistent track record shipping flagship consumer digital products |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, sharing a parent with the Accenture Song listing elsewhere on this site |
| - | Its premium client base implies premium pricing, though no minimum is published |
| - | Less vertical specialization in fintech or healthcare than boutiques built around a single niche |
| 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 Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outsizes its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
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: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Work & Co |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Work & Co (Not published) vs Doberman (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Work & Co |
| 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: Work & Co vs Doberman
| Use case | Work & Co fit | Doberman fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| Service design for a Nordic bank or public-sector organization | Limited | Strong | Doberman |
| 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: Work & Co vs Doberman
Work & Co (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outsizes its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model.
Doberman (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need product innovation engagement backed by a large consulting network. If your situation matches that, Doberman is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Work & Co vs Doberman FAQ
Is Work & Co better than Doberman?
Work & Co (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Work & Co's strongest advantage: client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to a ~425-person studio. Doberman's strongest advantage: nearly three decades of continuous operation since 1998, longer than most European boutiques on this list.
How do Work & Co and Doberman differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team 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: Work & Co or Doberman?
Work & Co 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 Work & Co and Doberman?
Work & Co's primary differentiator is: a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outsizes its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. 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 (425+ vs 100+ (within EY's global network)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Financial services / fintech, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.