UI/UX Design Services

User experience design services cover the research and structure behind a product (user flows, information architecture, wireframes, prototypes, usability testing), while user interface design services cover what users see and touch (visual systems, interaction states, responsive layouts, production-ready screens). A full engagement usually runs both, plus a design system so the result stays consistent as the product grows.

At DBB, the scope extends past the design file into implementation.

Product Discovery answers what to build: requirements, architecture, a prioritized feature list, first wireframes, and a budget range, delivered as a Scope Document. Our UI/UX services cover the design of a product that already exists or already has a scope.

If you are starting with an idea but have nothing specified yet, Discovery is the cheaper and more useful first step.

Per industry averages, a focused UX audit typically runs from around $1,500 to $6,000, a design engagement for a single product commonly lands between roughly $15,000 and $60,000, and a large multi-platform redesign with a design system usually runs $60,000 to $150,000 or more. Cost tracks the number of screens, the depth of research, and how much of the existing product has to be reverse-engineered first.

Custom work doesn't fit a fixed price list, so rather than quote a misleading number, our Scope Document generator gives you a free ballpark in minutes.

A UX audit is usually 1–3 weeks. A single-product design engagement commonly runs 4–10 weeks from research to a developer-ready design system, and a large redesign across web and mobile runs 3–6 months, typically rolled out in stages.

Our architect-led, AI-accelerated approach shortens these: expect a clickable prototype in about a week and a designed-and-built first release in about a month.

A UX audit is a structured review of your live product against usage data, analytics, and interaction heuristics, run to find where users stall, abandon, or contact support. Our UI/UX audit services return a written findings report, annotated screens showing each problem in context, and a fix list ranked by impact against engineering effort.

Most audits find that a small number of screens cause most of the damage, which is usually cheaper than a full redesign.

Both, and the second is the point. We deliver design tokens and a documented component library your engineers consume in code, then our own front-end team can take the work into production with React, Next.js, and TypeScript.

That is why we describe this as UI/UX design and development services. On JLL's platform we ran the redesign in Figma, built it in React, A/B tested it against the existing version, and migrated the platform to Next.js. If you prefer to build in-house, the handoff includes the documentation and design QA to keep your build faithful to the design.

Yes. We design to WCAG 2.2 AA by default, which covers the technical requirements behind the European Accessibility Act (in force since June 2025 for products sold into the EU) and ADA expectations in the US. Contrast, focus order, keyboard paths, target sizes, and screen-reader semantics are decided during design.

Handling accessibility at design stage costs a fraction of retrofitting it after a build, which is how most teams end up doing it. Our web development team carries the same standard through implementation.

Usually, yes. Incremental redesign is the most common shape our UX services take: a new design system applied screen by screen, or a single high-traffic flow reworked and validated before anything else moves. This keeps the roadmap running and lets you measure whether the new version actually performs better.

We validate significant changes against the current version before full rollout, so you see the effect before committing to it.

You do, completely. Figma files, design tokens, the component library, documentation, and any code we write transfer to you with full intellectual property rights. There is no lock-in and no licensing arrangement on the design system.

UX design decides how a product works: what the user is trying to do, the steps to get there, and the structure that supports them. UI design decides how it looks and responds: layout, typography, color, states, and motion.

A product can fail on either. Good UI on a confused structure still frustrates users, and a sound structure in a dated interface still loses to competitors on first impression.