Flexaspect
Overall Review Rating
4.6 (6 Ratings)
Overview
Their main goal is to provide reliable, scalable and cost-efficient software products to corporate and individual clients from North America, Europe, and Asia. They specialize in transforming your brand’s presence from run-of-the-mill to remarkable. They solve problems, make excellent digital products, and increase effectiveness on platforms. They are proud of their successes, so do not stop to ask for references!
Services
- Azure Services
- Custom Application Development
- Enterprise App Modernization
- Cloud Security Services
- Cloud Computing Software
- iOS App Development
- Cross Platform Development
- Custom Software Development
- Web Development
- Android App Development
- 3D & Interior Design
- Mobile App Development
Industries Served
Flexaspect Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Alejandro Ruiz
CTO - Ibertech Solutions SLDesigned for actual user behaviour, not the persona document we thought was accurate
The knowledge transfer at the end of the project was notably good. Too many vendors see handover as a tick-box exercise. This team ran structured sessions, produced documentation our internal team actually references, and spent real time making sure we understood the architecture decisions well enough to maintain and extend the system independently. Six months later we are doing exactly that without needing to go back to them for every question.
Project summary
Clinical trial data management was running on a system that had been extended well past its design intent. Quality risks in that context are not acceptable — we needed a proper rebuild.
Katrin Bauer
Head of Product Management - Bayern Software KGBlockchain expertise delivered with plain-English explanations at every step
We handed them an aggressive deadline, a complex scope, and a client-side team that was stretched and not always available when they needed us. They handled that gracefully. They were precise about what they needed and when they needed it. Where they could proceed independently they did. The delivery landed on time in spite of the constraints we added. I regard that as strong evidence of genuine professional maturity — not just capability.
Project summary
A merger left us maintaining two incompatible student systems. Data was duplicated, staff were frustrated, and the consolidation had been deferred twice. It could not wait any longer.
Liselotte Bakker
Head of Platform Engineering - Harbour Digital BVOur old app had a 2.8 rating. The new one is at 4.6. The comparison is all you need.
Three months post-launch our key metrics are all moving in the right direction — user adoption ahead of target, support volume down, time-on-task reduced for our core workflows. The product team has started planning features that were never viable on the previous platform. That is the real proof of the investment: it opened up possibilities rather than just replacing what was there before.
Project summary
Our internal team was committed to maintenance and could not absorb a new build of this complexity. An external partner was the only way to hit the timeline.
Aarav Mehta
Chief Data Officer - Zenith FinServ LtdDelivered what the proposal described. More rare than it should be.
We went with a smaller team than we had originally planned for. I had concerns about whether the capacity would be sufficient given our timeline. Those concerns were unfounded. The team was focused, communication was constant, and the quality at each milestone review was consistent throughout. Smaller does not mean slower when the people are the right ones and this engagement proved that.
Project summary
Years of incremental development had left us with a platform that was functional but limiting. A structured rebuild was the agreed path forward.
Elliot Thorne
Managing Director, Technology - Redwood Capital AdvisorsA development partner who pushed back when our approach was wrong — exactly what we needed
I have been through several technology implementations in my career. The pattern I am used to is: detailed proposal, optimistic timeline, scope creep, overrun, excuses at the end. This engagement broke that pattern at every stage. The timeline was realistic from the start. Changes were managed through process. The final delivery matched what was agreed. Simple, but uncommon.
Project summary
Our product thinking was strong. Our execution capacity in this specific domain was limited. We needed deep expertise, not a generalist willing to learn on our time.