Work & Co vs SPCSHP: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Work & Co (3.8/5) edges ahead of SPCSHP (3.8/5) overall. Work & Co is the better choice for premium brands, design plus production-grade engineering. SPCSHP is the stronger option for consumer brands, design plus creative storytelling. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Work & Co vs SPCSHP: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | SPCSHP |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 2000 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | Brooklyn, NY, USA |
| Team size | 425+ | Not published (historically ~50+) |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.8 / 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 quarter-century of creative digital work (JetBlue, YouTube, Samsung, BMW) under a 2024 rebrand from Big Spaceship to SPCSHP, now backed by MSQ |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Project-based (not published) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, React, Next.js | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, React |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Media & entertainment, Enterprise transformation |
Work & Co vs SPCSHP: 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.
SPCSHP
Michael Lebowitz founded Big Spaceship in Brooklyn in 2000, building a creative digital firm known for early-2000s work with JetBlue, YouTube, Samsung Galaxy, BMW, and NBC. UK marketing group MSQ acquired the firm in October 2024, and it now operates under the name SPCSHP — a rebrand recent enough that some case studies and press still reference the original name. The firm's roots are in interactive creative and brand storytelling rather than pure enterprise product design, a lineage that still shows in its client work.
Services and capabilities: Work & Co vs SPCSHP
| Capability | Work & Co | SPCSHP |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs SPCSHP
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | SPCSHP |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | N/A | ✓ |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Work & Co vs SPCSHP
| Criterion | Work & Co | SPCSHP |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SPCSHP
| Dimension | Work & Co | SPCSHP |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Media & entertainment, Enterprise transformation |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Consumer brand digital product design with a creative-storytelling emphasis, Campaign-adjacent product design for a media or entertainment brand |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Work & Co vs SPCSHP: 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 |
| SPCSHP | |
|---|---|
| + | A quarter-century of continuous operation since its 2000 founding as Big Spaceship |
| + | Named client work spans JetBlue, YouTube, Samsung Galaxy, BMW, GE, Microsoft, and Google |
| + | MSQ backing since October 2024 provides access to a larger marketing and creative network |
| + | Creative-and-brand-storytelling roots differentiate it from purely process-driven enterprise design firms |
| - | Rebranded from Big Spaceship to SPCSHP in 2024 — recent enough that some public case studies and reviews still reference the old name |
| - | Acquired by MSQ in 2024, so clients are hiring into a larger network rather than an independent studio |
| - | Team size isn't published in current sources, making capacity planning harder without a direct conversation |
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 SPCSHP?
A typical fit: consumer brand digital product design with a creative-storytelling emphasis.
A quarter-century of creative digital work (JetBlue, YouTube, Samsung, BMW) under a 2024 rebrand from Big Spaceship to SPCSHP, now backed by MSQ. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Media & entertainment, Enterprise transformation.
Decision matrix: Work & Co vs SPCSHP
| 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 SPCSHP (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 SPCSHP
| Use case | Work & Co fit | SPCSHP 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 |
| Consumer brand digital product design with a creative-storytelling emphasis | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Campaign-adjacent product design for a media or entertainment brand | Limited | Strong | SPCSHP |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Work & Co vs SPCSHP
Work & Co (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaces its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model.
SPCSHP (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need campaign-adjacent product design for a media or entertainment brand. If your situation matches that, SPCSHP is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Work & Co vs SPCSHP FAQ
Is Work & Co better than SPCSHP?
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 headcount. SPCSHP's strongest advantage: a quarter-century of continuous operation since its 2000 founding as Big Spaceship.
How do Work & Co and SPCSHP differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. SPCSHP 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 SPCSHP?
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 SPCSHP?
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. SPCSHP's primary differentiator is: a quarter-century of creative digital work (JetBlue, YouTube, Samsung, BMW) under a 2024 rebrand from Big Spaceship to SPCSHP, now backed by MSQ. They also differ in team size (425+ vs Not published (historically ~50+)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Consumer products, Media & entertainment).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.