Serokell
Overall Review Rating
4.1 (6 Ratings)
Overview
Serokell is a software company focused on building modern solutions for your most complex problems. Our team is composed of all kinds of experts – developers, QA engineers, UX/UI designers, computer scientists and mathematicians. Our goal is to guide you from an idea to a complete product.
Services
- Hybrid App Development
- AI Development
- Mobile App Development
- Cryptocurrency Wallet Development
- Cloud Solutions
- Web Development
- Big Data
- Cross Platform App Development
- Android App Development
- Automotive R&D
- Cross Platform Development
- iOS App Development
Industries Served
Serokell Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Radosław Kowalczyk
Head of Development - Wisła Software Sp zooOur 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
A failed engagement the previous year had made us more rigorous about vendor selection. We took the time to find a partner we actually trusted before we committed.
Lars Pfeiffer
VP of Technology - NordTech Logistik GmbH99.97% uptime since go-live. Our SRE team finally sleeps.
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
A failed engagement the previous year had made us more rigorous about vendor selection. We took the time to find a partner we actually trusted before we committed.
Lynne Robichaud
Director of Product - Atlantic Digital CorpThe team knew blockchain AND our industry — combination we struggled to find elsewhere
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
First notice of loss was averaging three days. The market benchmark was under four hours. Automating intake and triage was the agreed priority for the year.
Wei Xin Chua
Product Director - Lionhead Digital Pte LtdThe outcome we needed, on the timeline we needed it, by people we would use again
We received proposals from six vendors. Four of them quoted us prices that bore no relationship to the actual scope. This team came back with something realistic and then delivered against it exactly. I have worked on enough technology projects to know that the gap between what is proposed and what is delivered is where trust gets destroyed. There was no gap here. What was promised is what we got, and the ongoing relationship we have built from this is something we intend to continue.
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.
Alejandro Ruiz
CTO - Ibertech Solutions SLOur sales team adopted it in the first week without a single complaint
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 field service management system was six years old and every limitation had been exposed by the growth in our technician headcount and job complexity.