Kaizen Softworks
Overall Review Rating
4.5 (6 Ratings)
Services
- .NET Development
- Branding
- 3D & Interior Design
- Cross Platform Development
- Mobile App Development
- CMS Solutions
- E-commerce Development
- Data Analytics
- Android App Development
- iOS App Development
- Private Blockchains
- Web Development
Industries Served
Kaizen Softworks Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Victoria Haines
Chief Product Officer - Solaris Media GroupDesign system that finally brought visual consistency to a product with four years of debt
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
Track-and-trace had gone from differentiator to baseline expectation in our client contracts. Our platform had neither and the gap was showing up in tender evaluations.
Alejandro Ruiz
CTO - Ibertech Solutions SLThe team knew blockchain AND our industry — combination we struggled to find elsewhere
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
The project had a board-level visibility date. We needed a partner who would treat the deadline as their own.
Laura Jiménez
Head of Digital Products - Catalonia Digital SLOur old app had a 2.8 rating. The new one is at 4.6. The comparison is all you need.
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
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.
Flynn Buchanan
GM of Technology - Pacific Rim Commerce GroupConversion rate improved from the first week in production. Design decisions backed by data.
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
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.
Théo Beaumont
VP of Innovation - Laurentian Tech PartnersERP went live on the agreed date. Those of you who have been through ERP projects understand.
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 new commercial property division required tooling that was fundamentally different from our residential platform. Extending the existing system was not viable.