GoingClear Interactive
Overall Review Rating
4.6 (5 Ratings)
Overview
It was established in 2001. Their focus is designing winning interactive website properties supported by a stable and scalable framework so that as your company continues to evolve, your website will be flexible enough to do the same. Their focus is creating engaging interactive website properties supported by a stable and scalable framework.
Services
- Cross Platform App Development
- Android App Development
- Cross Platform Development
- Web Development
- Mobile App Development
- Azure Services
- Ionic App Development
- Motion Graphics
- Machine Learning
- iPhone App Development
- iOS App Development
- Advertising, Media
Industries Served
GoingClear Interactive Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Aarav Mehta
Chief Data Officer - Zenith FinServ LtdConversion rate improved from the first week in production. Design decisions backed by data.
What set this team apart in practice was their engineering judgment — specifically, their willingness to tell us when our requirements were wrong and explain what to do instead. Not every vendor does that. The consultative element elevated the final output well beyond what our original brief described. We ended up with something better than what we had asked for, which is not a sentence I expected to be writing in a review.
Project summary
As a technology company ourselves we hold our vendors to the same standard our clients hold us to. Finding a partner who could meet that bar without being hand-held through the process was the challenge.
Victoria Haines
Chief Product Officer - Solaris Media GroupClear-eyed assessment of where we were, followed by a credible plan forward
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
The business case had been approved but the internal resource to execute it had not materialised. External delivery was the pragmatic solution.
Eoghan Fitzgerald
VP of Engineering - Shannon Tech Solutions LtdDelivered what the proposal described. More rare than it should be.
Looking back, what strikes me most is how little drama there was. Real technology projects have problems. This one had them too — but every problem was flagged before it became a crisis, every scope change was handled through a proper process, and every risk was managed rather than buried. Our project manager said it was the smoothest vendor engagement he had been involved in. Given how complex the technical requirements were, I think that reflects genuine delivery maturity.
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.
Abdullah Al-Shehri
Head of Innovation - Desert Tech VenturesERP went live on the agreed date. Those of you who have been through ERP projects understand.
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
A major enterprise client contract required API-level integration with their supply chain platform. We had thirty days to demonstrate capability and our existing system could not provide it.
Kenji Watanabe
Senior Engineering Manager - Fuji Software CorpHeadless commerce that finally gave our marketing team the independence they needed
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
Broker portal satisfaction scores had fallen for two consecutive years. Specific feedback pointed to the same workflow frustrations. We needed a redesign, not a patch.