Work & Co vs Projects by IF: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Projects by IF (4.0/5) edges ahead of Work & Co (3.8/5) overall. Projects by IF is the better choice for Tech/public-sector, trust- and policy-aware design. Work & Co is the stronger option for premium brands, design plus production-grade engineering. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Work & Co vs Projects by IF: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 2016 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | London, UK |
| Team size | 425+ | Not published |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaces its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model | A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Project-based (not published) |
| 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 | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech |
Work & Co vs Projects by IF: overview
Work & Co
Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo founded Work & Co in Dumbo, Brooklyn in May 2013, later opening offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe. At roughly 425 people, the firm's client list — Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, Disney — punches well above its size, largely because design and front-end engineering are handled by the same team rather than separate vendors. Accenture Song acquired Work & Co in 2023.
Projects by IF
Sarah Gold founded Projects by IF in London in 2016, building a strategic design practice around a specific problem: helping technology-enabled organizations design for trust at scale. That focus — spanning product and experience design, digital strategy, regulation and policy work, and technology architecture — has produced client relationships with Google, the UK Government, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, an unusual combination of big tech and public-sector work for a studio this size.
Services and capabilities: Work & Co vs Projects by IF
| Capability | Work & Co | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs Projects by IF
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Projects by IF
| Criterion | Work & Co | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Projects by IF
| Dimension | Work & Co | Projects by IF |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Public-sector or government digital service design, Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Work & Co vs Projects by IF: pros and cons
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to headcount |
| + | Design and engineering under one roof cuts the hand-off risk of splitting vendors |
| + | 425+ people across the US, Europe, and Latin America give real multi-region capacity |
| + | Consistent record shipping flagship consumer digital products |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, which shares a parent with the Accenture Song entry elsewhere in this list |
| - | A premium client base implies premium pricing even without a published minimum |
| - | Less vertical specialization (fintech, healthcare-specific) than boutiques built around one niche |
| Projects by IF | |
|---|---|
| + | Purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer |
| + | Client list combines big tech (Google) with public-sector work (UK Government), demonstrating range within its niche |
| + | Founder-led since 2016 under CEO Sarah Gold, giving a consistent point of view across engagements |
| + | Services span product design through policy and regulatory design, useful for regulated or public-facing products |
| - | Team size isn't published in available sources, making capacity planning harder for large programs |
| - | Trust-and-policy specialization is a narrower fit for clients wanting pure visual or brand design |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
Who should choose Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaces 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 Projects by IF?
A typical fit: public-sector or government digital service design.
A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech.
Decision matrix: Work & Co vs Projects by IF
| 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 Projects by IF (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 Projects by IF
| Use case | Work & Co fit | Projects by IF fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| Public-sector or government digital service design | Limited | Strong | Projects by IF |
| Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform | Limited | Strong | Projects by IF |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Work & Co vs Projects by IF
Projects by IF (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government.
Work & Co (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need e-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering. If your situation matches that, Work & Co is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Work & Co vs Projects by IF FAQ
Is Work & Co better than Projects by IF?
Projects by IF (4.0/5) 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 headcount. Projects by IF's strongest advantage: purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer.
How do Work & Co and Projects by IF differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Projects by IF uses project-based (not published) 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 Projects by IF?
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 firm before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Work & Co and Projects by IF?
Work & Co's primary differentiator is: a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaces its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Projects by IF's primary differentiator is: a design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. They also differ in team size (425+ vs Not published), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Enterprise transformation, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.