ScienceSoft

Please describe your organization.

We are a lending business, and I head our IT [information technology] group.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

I use ScienceSoft for our SharePoint work. Our old SharePoint site was migrated from our previous company, and it was basically crap. We wanted a new look and feel for our new site. I was looking at multiple vendors throughout North America, and I found ScienceSoft when I Googled SharePoint vendors.

Please describe the scope of their involvement in detail.

They were involved in everything from designing the look and feel to setting up the development and UAT [user acceptance testing] for user acceptance to do the deployment and production. Right now, I use them for maintenance on a day-to-day basis. They're acting as our partner for SharePoint support. They used SharePoint 2013, which is a full Microsoft-based platform. Our Internet site is deployed on 2012 Microsoft Windows. We used SQL Server 2012, so that was another technology that they used in developing this project.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

There were two reasons I was attracted to ScienceSoft. One was cost, which was the major driving force. The second one was the response time. I love the way they work. My account manager was a fantastic guy. I email him with my requirements, and they read my mind. I want somebody who doesn't just do the job that I'm telling them to do, but also comes up with new ideas.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

We've spent between $10,000 and $50,000

What is the status of this engagement?

I began working with them in March or April [2016]. They were helpful in creating the entire SharePoint site for us. That was the initial project, which they completed on time. I have also hired them on a day-to-day maintenance basis, so it's going to be ongoing for one year.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

The response time and the perfection of their work was very important to me. We had our users compare the new SharePoint site to the old one, and the response I got on the look and feel was just fantastic. It truly represents our company, and that's what I was looking for – not just somebody who can update the documents and all of that.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

They did exceptionally well. The communication was very easy. I would tell them the requirements and they would understand it right away. They would come up with a solution immediately. The best thing about them is if they say they're going to deliver within a certain timeframe, they will do that. There has not been a single instance where I've had to follow up with them and check on what they're doing.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

It was their prompt response, great cost, and excellent project management, which I would like to highlight.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

Because many of their people are offshore, it's sometimes a little challenging to understand their conversation. Same for me, too, because I'm from India. Apart from that, there isn't anything I can point to.

Please describe your organization.

The company name is Chiron Health. We are an Austin, Texas based startup in the healthcare industry - basically telemedicine. We provide a platform which allows doctors to talk to their patients via a web-based audio/video platform.

What is your position?

I am the Chief Technology Officer.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We engaged them to build our Android mobile app. This is an app that complements our web-based app for our patients. We have an iOS app developed already so we wanted to get an app on Android that looked similar to the iOS app.

Please describe the scope of their involvement in greater detail.

They helped test the app as it was in development. They designed the app as well.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

I don’t remember exact searches, but I used Google to search for offshore development firms. I looked around Austin and then at a few different countries. I have experience with Latin American countries as well as Eastern European.

I put the prospect firms into two categories - offshore and within the US, and then had interviews with the offshore companies to talk about the engagement and the scope. ScienceSoft convinced me that they would be able to deliver the product, so I went with them.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

We had a list of features we knew we wanted at launch. We got an estimate from ScienceSoft scoped at three months and around $15,000. Everything was pretty accurate.

What is the status of this engagement?

It’s completed. We are in a warranty period. They are giving us support to fix bugs, and there haven’t been any bugs that we are aware of.

We do plan to engage them for some other projects. We want to add new features to the app. We’ve thought of new features to improve it. We want to engage them on a project for QA [quality assurance] testing. They have QA testing resources where they can help test our products.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

I can compare this to our iOS app. That was our first mobile app and we had that developed by an Austin firm for much more money than our offshore firm. Our launch for the iOS app actually launched with quite a few critical bugs, which rendered the app unusable.

The experience with ScienceSoft was much better. We actually were able to do proper testing before we launched, partly because we learned from our mistakes on iOS, but ScienceSoft really facilitated testing on our beta environment.

We would be testing and they would see the logs on their end and fix crashes as we were testing the app. We also did it in a beta fashion. We enabled a beta program on the Google Play store and launched that way with ScienceSoft on standby to fix any bugs.

We don’t have any critical bugs filed from our users, a perfect score. We’re still gathering specifics about user engagement and the workflow and utilization of the app.

I wouldn’t say those stats are specifically significant though. We’re doing some workflow changes on our end. We are encouraging more users to use the app, but there are some reasons from our business perspective that keep us from wanting the app to be used widely right now.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

ScienceSoft had a project manager assigned to our project and our method of communication was very close. We had phone calls whenever we needed. They also joined our chat room via Slack. So the project manager and the two developers would be in daily contact with our developers in our company chat room. 

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

Overall, the engagement with ScienceSoft was probably the best offshore experience that I’ve had. I’ve worked with Indian firms and Costa Rican firms in the past to provide perspective. Estimation and communication was all spot on as well.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

On our end, we had some APIs [application program interfaces] that we should have prepared beforehand. So there was a slight delay on the project, but I would attribute that to Chiron because we had to build out the backend API a little more so the mobile app could connect to it.

The engineers from ScienceSoft were very open about that and flexible to wait for us, and then they also brought up solutions.

Please describe your organization.

We are a small company founded in 1995. Our main areas of operation are web hosting and development for web, Mac OS and iOS.

What is your position?

I am the owner and Chief Executive Officer of the company.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We needed a developer for the Android versions of our apps.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

We've worked on about ten projects with ScienceSoft. All of them have been for native Android development.

We mostly build free informational apps. They typically retrieve their data from backend servers in order for it to be browsed. Examples include tourist information apps or an event organizer for a political campaign.

Their team consisted of two developers and one project manager. We are charged only for the developers' work. Our latest project has been run on times and material, instead of having a fixed price. This approach is usually cheaper in the end but also involves greater risk.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

They contacted us ten years ago. We had a meeting with a sales representative, and their proposition sounded good. It was our first encounter with an outsourcing company, and we haven't used any other vendor yet. The relationship has been good, and we saw no need to look for other suppliers.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

A typical project with them costs around $10-15,000.

What is the status of this engagement?

We have an ongoing relationship for development and maintenance work.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

The tourism app we've developed has been the most popular overall, totaling around 50,000 downloads. Reviews can vary a lot as is usually the case. We have a lot of five-star reviews, but we also have one-star ones, mostly due to competing companies wanting to drag the app down.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

Our projects aren't very complex, so communication is mostly done through email. We use GitHub for version tracking. ScienceSoft performed will in that environment and we never had any major issues with their approach or delivered work.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

They're a professional and dedicated company. Their developers are quite skilled. Some of them specialize in bug detection, while others are versed in writing stable code.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

No, not really. I haven't had any surprises with ScienceSoft, and they always fix bugs free of charge. Starting our work with detailed specifications helps avoid problems.

Please describe your organization.

We work mostly in the marketing and media industries, assisting advertisers in deciding which media they should use for reaching a target audience, how much they're going to spend, and what their expectations should be.

What is your position?

I am part of the systems and development team.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We were looking to outsource work in order to have more flexibility with managing our resources. We wanted to establish a long-term partnership with an outsourced solution that could offer us development resources as the need arose.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

ScienceSoft works as a separate team in our company and are in charge of developing projects and deliverables. They are part of two groups: a .NET team and a WPF [Windows Presentation Foundation] one. We're developing a WPF application with many of their members working in the frontend.

They also do data processing work for ETL development using SQL, Python and other such tools.

The team they provide is composed of 20-25 developers. We're directly involved in the selection process. ScienceSoft provides us with resumes for candidates, we participate in the interview process and sit together to make decisions.

Whenever a developer is too slow or making too many mistakes, we will contact ScienceSoft about it and they will assign someone else.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

We found them a long time ago. We researched 10-15 companies around the world, in order to find an outsourcing partner. They were the most suitable candidate.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

The average cost per year is $200,000.

What is the status of this engagement?

We have an ongoing relationship with them.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

There aren’t any figures or statistics that I could share because ScienceSoft is working alongside our own developers on end products. As a result, everything that they complete is also in collaboration with our own developers. There is no way to really differentiate between the two, but I can definitely tell you that our own staff has been very impressed with the level and consistency of quality delivered by ScienceSoft.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

They're an extension of our team, so project management is our responsibility. They're bred for inputs, rather than results. We use Jira for project collaboration and we’ve found that very helpful.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

I don't have much experience with other outsourcing companies. What's important for us is that ScienceSoft provides good developers, and most of them are.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

We are a software developer ourselves. For me, there isn't a big difference between hiring a developer locally, and hiring them through ScienceSoft. The interview process is the same.

If a client is not a software producer and has to rely more on the project management and architecture development that ScienceSoft provides, the collaboration would be different than my own experience.

Please describe your organization.

We have a micro payment solution. What we want to do is make micro transactions and micro payments on the Internet as easy as possible. We use a new approach. That basically means that you can purchase content without pre-registration and without upfront payment. We operate a running tab for you and collect or aggregate your purchases and once you have reached the total 5 Euros, we only ask you for an email address, a password and your payment details and only then you have to pay. From that point in time, you can start aggregating again until 5 Euros or 5 US Dollars. What we offer for content providers is an Application Program Interface [API] integration so people can talk directly to our server or they can use a WordPress plug-in, and that's basically where ScienceSoft took over an important role because we didn’t have the necessary skill set to do it internally.

What is your position?

I’m product manager within the company.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

The reason that we contacted ScienceSoft was that we are a small team. We only had 15 people at that point in time, both on the tech and the business side, and we weren’t really flexible. Because people were working on infrastructure, on improving the system itself, on improving tracking, we wanted to offer this as an easier way of integrating later pay into a WordPress system. This was important because WordPress is the most widespread content management system and we didn’t have the capability or the capacity to build the functionality we needed. We researched a bit and first we worked with a different provider and the problem was that they were way too expensive for what they were delivering. I don’t know how we actually stumbled upon ScienceSoft, but we gave them a small piece of work just to test their abilities. They did well, so we transitioned over to them.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

It was January 2014 when we had finished the specifications for the WordPress plug-in, and in April they joined the development and they built it from the ground up. We have a very close exchange and they basically developed it step-by-step with our guidance and supervision. We had three developers in the first year and then when everything was almost finished for version 0.9, we bumped that down to just two of them.

Once they finished the WordPress plug-in, we expanded the scope of ScienceSoft’s involvement. They helped us with customizing the plug-in further and adding new features. They also transferred some of the plug-in functionality in a customized project for Typo 3. We have a huge customer which is a huge media brand in Germany, and they run the content management system on Typo 3 and so we said we could share the costs with this customer and develop a new type of plug-in. We roped ScienceSoft into that work and they did excellent with developing a prototype.

How did you come to work with Science Soft?

Like I said, it was through some initial research after we decided to terminate our relationship with a previous vendor.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

I’m not involved in the financial aspect.

What is the status of this engagement?

It was about one and a half or two months ago that we did work with them. We thought that the plug-in is now at a point that we could almost go to version 1.0. We didn’t do that because we wanted to have kind of a buffer in case some problems occur. They’ll also be helping us with ongoing maintenance and support.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

There are two things I could share. One is for the WordPress plug-in itself. People are very satisfied with it. If and when we get feedback, it's usually quite positive. People, of course, have feature requests and stuff, but the plug-in itself has a lot of options that can satisfy almost any request, and people say it’s very stable. People sometimes have trouble, but then they come to the second point where I can give feedback on. ScienceSoft also does integration support for us. For instance, if a customer has trouble of setting something up or something's not working that is usually caused by their set-up and not by the plug-in itself, we can call ScienceSoft or write them and say, "Hey can you help this customer her or his credentials or his testing system, could you please just have a look?" People are typically very impressed by how quickly ScienceSoft is able to help them. I usually play the intermediary, so I ask Alex from ScienceSoft to have a look because the customers are mostly German, so there's a certain language barrier.

How did Science Soft perform from a project management standpoint?

They always delivered on time and within the specified budget. What I found quite impressive was their talent pool. The developers at ScienceSoft are extremely seasoned and very driven. They definitely love a challenge, which is great. You always get a response to your questions. If and when urgent issues arise, they’re usually resolved within a few hours. We used Github Issue Tracker and Slack for collaboration and project management, which worked well for us as well.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

Their product management is extremely well done. They are really quick, determined and responsive. If you ask if they have an additional resource for us because we have a project coming up or a feature that has to be done very quickly, then they usually respond within one day already with an offer, and already with estimations if you provided the requirement before. They're really quick with that stuff. They are leagues above the previous vendor we used.

Is there anything Science Soft could have improved or done differently?

I’m excited about them. Their involvement has been hugely beneficial to the growth of our company and the success with our solutions. They’re doing an incredibly good job, all of them.

Please describe your organization.

I run the Vendor Management Office for professional services as a software development company that's been in business since 1999.

What is your position?

I’m the director of the company.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We were struggling to be able to find the caliber of resources at the price point or at the salary we wanted to pay within the two markets in which we have a physical presence. I'm pretty sure this is a standard dilemma that many companies face. And so, 10 years ago, we had a lackluster attempt at offshoring and we failed miserably. We didn't really give it the attention or the management that it required to ensure success. We would send the deliverables over the fence in the end and wonder why it didn't come back exactly the way we expected.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

We were having issues trying to find the right resources, specifically for a couple of different projects for a US-based customer. We needed senior level .NET developers to place at the project.

We were trying to put together this product with a very aggressive timeline, and we had been unable to document it as well as it should have been. It wasn't built the best way possible, and we knew that we needed a lot of very talented developers. We didn’t have the luxury of time to do this, to hire permanent resources on our own, so we decided to outsource.

We needed experienced people that we could throw into the existing project and immediately start treading water and start advancing the project, so I did some research online. ScienceSoft was a large enough company that seemed to have access to the types of individuals that we were looking for. So, that was our initial engagement with them, and we went with a time and materials model. We added a few senior .NET developers from ScienceSoft to an existing project team right out of Canada. It was an à la carte model and we sent those individual contributors as a part of the larger project team to help them meet their deadlines.

They impressed us and impressed the team with the caliber of resources they had assigned to our project. As a result, we went over to visit ScienceSoft in Minsk, checked out their offices there and met some of their executives. They impressed us even more at that point with their approach and corporate culture. We eventually moved away from a time and materials model and the à la carte model because it tends to be the most expensive way to engage. We decided to move to a flat monthly rate model with a couple of the really cornerstone people that we wanted to keep.

We've also sent them a Request for Proposal [RFP] on projects that we've documented properly. We're at the level now with ScienceSoft that we trust them entirely, and they know us well enough that we trust them with significant chunks of work.

Quite some time ago, we had roughly 12 resources with ScienceSoft. They ran the gamut between .NET developments to quality assurance and quality control [QA/QC]. Right now, we've got .NET, Android, and iOS developers with them. More importantly, they have no weak spots in regards to being able to get resources with the different tech or different developers. They seem to be strong across the board with the professionals that they have access to.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

I reached out to them directly. I didn't have the luxury of a review system like Clutch at the time. I found them and reached out to them directly by phone. I was sent to a sales account manager and we did various Skype meetings. We reviewed my expectations and they went over what they needed, to see whether or not it was fit. Then, like we do with all new vendors, we kept it very small. We took a .NET developer and assigned that person to an existing project. This minimizes our risk to the project. If they perform to our standards, we then slowly expand and add more resources. This way, as the resource is working and as we're adding, modifying or adjusting things, from a management point of view, I can see how they're structured on their side. I can also get a sense of whether or not they’re able to deliver at the rate that I'm looking for. ScienceSoft checked off all the boxes.

We have indirect input with regards to whom they assign to our work. We interview every single resource before they are assigned to our projects and we make sure that they send us the CV to go through it. I'm sourcing for multiple vendors, so we're comparing cost versus caliber, not only from them, but also against everybody else that we use. We'll also have direct involvement in every single interview. Most of the time we need to make sure that there's continuity, and that they will be a good fit for an existing project.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

I think this month we're at a shadow of what we used to be with them. They have five guys with them now. We've had upwards of a dozen at any given time. The invoice this year is about $35,000 per month. In total, it's about half a million dollars this year. We've been in business with them for approximately three years now.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

I've got all the resources and all the vendors listed in a database on my side. What we'll do is, I'll go in and I'll rate the vendor, but then I'll leave it to the team members or the team leads and the project managers to go in and rate the vendors at the resource level. They'll go in and they'll say, for example, 'this resource is 5-stars, based on several criteria.' Then we can tally and compare vendors.

We've been doing this process internally and that helps me keep track of how the vendors are doing versus other vendors and what regions are performing better than other regions. This helps me make business decisions and figure out the best way to proceed. I don't have anything that's publishable; it's just internal stuff that we've been tracking.

The caliber of resources that they've got and the quality of resources that we've engaged have been top notch. There's no question about that.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

Most of our projects are Agile/Scrum based. We don't do the traditional 3D waterfall projects anymore. The whole process is very iterative. We're meeting with their resources on a day-to-day basis. We're doing scrums, and we're getting our marching orders for the day, and we're getting ready for the next delivery. Tools that we're using internally with these guys include Skype and Google Hangouts for face-to-face communication. And we're also using the Atlassian suite of products like JIRA and so on to send tasks and bugs and all that stuff back and forth.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

From my perspective, they're the largest vendor that I've dealt with. It's right in my comfort zone because we're not a huge IT company either. A smaller vendor is always a bit more flexible and less process-oriented. They're a large company, and so they're very structured and they're process-heavy, which is a good thing and a bad thing. It's a good thing because it gives me the sense of security that they've got all the bases covered, that they're taking responsibility for their resources and that there's all that back-end organization and support. That's been great, but on the flip side, there's a little less flexibility than there would be with some of the mid-sized vendors, in terms of price, currency, etc.

ScienceSoft is great in my books if you need to get something done quickly and at a consistently high level of quality. You know they’re going to put top-tier guys on it, but you’re paying for that, too. You're always going to be juggling these types of competing interests.

The pressure that I'm getting from my guys is dollar-based and it always will be. We need to make as much margin as we can between our cost of labor and what we're billing out. As a result, there will be increased pressure on companies like ScienceSoft to be more competitive in the way they structure their pricing models. And so, if we were to talk this time next year, I don't know if I'd still be working with ScienceSoft. That doesn’t mean that I wouldn't recommend them because, overall, it's been a positive experience and they really helped us out of a jam. It's just the way my company and I are approaching offshore companies from now on.

Please describe your organization.

We're a major travel retailer in Canada. We do half of our business online, and the other half offline like a traditional travel agency. We have about 200 employees, and we sell all kinds of travel products like vacation packages, flights, hotels – stuff like that. We have an online booking engine, which allows people to make real-time bookings. We have a few spinoffs of the site, one of which is mainly for our agents to do the same thing, but they get more functionality. We have white labels for our partner companies, and we have a lot of support, tools, and applications. We have been around for 20 years, so it's a well-known brand here in Canada.

What is your position?

I'm an enterprise architecture director.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We needed to expand our team because we had more stuff coming down the pipeline and too many competing priorities to finish the work in time. It was too challenging to hire local resources in Canada, so we looked to outsourcing options.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

We mostly use Microsoft technologies like .NET, SQL Server, and many web development tools like AngularJS. They're involved in the full scope of our applications, both the front-end and back-end development. I have four developers from ScienceSoft that I manage on a daily basis. Three of them are senior developers, and one is an intermediate developer. I cover the project management, and all the other resources, such as designers and business analysts, come from our side. They act as an extension of our development team. We collaborate very closely together.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

We found them online. They were among a handful of potential vendors we were considering. We went with them based on their previous experience and familiarity with our industry.

What is the status of this engagement?

The relationship is ongoing.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

Compared to our internal team, they perform well. I've been happy thus far with the performance that I'm getting from ScienceSoft. We don't keep or track any formal metrics, but they do the job, and they do it well. It would be hard to attribute the feedback we receive to their specific work, especially given the fact that everything goes through a QA [quality assurance] stage wherein any discovered issues are resolved. However, sometimes, I get more issues from our developers internally than from them. Overall, we're very pleased with their contributions. They're reliable.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

They pretty much deliver all of their assigned work on time and within budget. We have a process that is scrum based, and we use JIRA as a bug tracking and resolution tool. We split the projects into tasks, which are then created in JIRA and assigned to team members. I normally talk to them in terms of how things should be done. After that, they take the task and complete it, either individually or as a team, depending on the nature of the task itself.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

I like the fact that I have the freedom to pick and choose developers that I want on my team. I know exactly who is going to work on my projects. Some other companies generally take a project and find the resources on their own based on their availability.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

I can't think of anything in particular. I'm happy with what they do.

Please describe your organization.

We have created a mobile app for people who travel but don’t speak the native language of the country they're visiting. We have a patent pending solution that will enable people to build simple, everyday, conversational phrases on the go with their phone. All the content is curated into categories that real people use when they’re in situations at a café, a bar, a restaurant, etc. The system consists of a three-step process; to build a phrase, see it in your in the target language of the country you’re visiting, and hear a native speaker say it, plus you don’t need WiFi to use it. It’s a survival tool when you’re abroad.

What is your position?

I am the founder of the startup.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We needed someone to build out our first iOS app. We had the idea pretty well formulated, but we didn’t have the technical prowess to actually build it by ourselves. Because of our limited knowledge, we knew that we would need to find someone who could build it for us.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

We have UX/UI [user experience/user interface] experts in-house and we provided full designs to ScienceSoft. They were responsible for building the code on the initial prototype. The first iteration was a free product, and it was in three languages. Since then, we’ve added multiple languages. I believe we’re up to nine now. We’ve also added in-app purchases, so there have been dozens of updates and upgrades to the original product over the past two years. We also launched an Android version about a month ago.

We typically work with a small team composed of one designer and one developer. For one of the layers of the Android product, they provided two developers for us, but that’s the most that we’ve had to deploy.

The app displays a curated mix of content. It has the ability to switch between different languages and different sections, do audio file playback, and the ability to save what you’ve created within the app for later access. It has a pretty simple functionality.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

It was a direct referral. We had been through one nightmare situation before with a development group which did not end well, so I reached out to my network. Someone referred me to a different company, but when I contacted them, they didn’t have the resources to take on our project at the time. However, they told me that they often send work to ScienceSoft and vouched for them. I interviewed them, and we’ve been working together ever since.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

I would say it’s around $50,000 to $60,000.

What is the status of this engagement?

We started working with them about two years ago [2013], and the relationship is ongoing.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

The app has been very successful. It’s been downloaded 125,000 times. We have users in 175 countries. I believe that it’s a direct result of an existing need for the product by people who are traveling, not necessarily a result of the functionality of it. It’s the simplicity of the user experience that’s unique. We have received mostly positive reviews on the App Store regarding the functional reliability of the app.

We’ve had all kinds of bugs. Android, in particular, is a lot more buggy than the iOS product. Any issues that were identified were rectified almost immediately. We do all the QA [quality assurance] ourselves in order to keep costs down. Android has tools that you can deploy, which automatically generates crash notifications. When we launched Android, there was a lot of that, but now it’s stabilized.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

They have consistently delivered the work on time and within the specified budget. We communicate regularly through Skype and email. We’ve never found them unresponsive.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

The people there are marvelous workers; they have a great team. We’ve experienced almost no turnover, and the one I can think of didn’t impact us.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

We haven’t had any problems with them. We’re very happy with the entire relationship.

Please describe your organization.

Our business is in the downloadable applications area. I'm referring specifically to the business that ScienceSoft helped us with because it has changed a little bit since then. Downloadable applications meaning we developed and distributed executables, all sorts of utilities and programs – mostly for Windows platforms, but sometimes for Mac – provided to users as freeware. We generated revenue from search tools that we integrated into the installations of the programs via agreements that we have with Google.

What is your position?

I was the vice president of research and development.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

We had employees of our own in Belarus, but we simply had too much work to do, so ScienceSoft was a great solution for us to expand our capacity. We needed to develop more applications, and we were looking for teams to do that work. We needed experienced developers that could ramp up and down, depending on our project work.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

They initially developed two products for us. The first one doesn't exist anymore. It was an add-on to messengers, such as MSN Messenger and AOL Messenger, and it would add a toolbar with emoticons and winks that you could use during conversations. The other product is a program like WinZip, and we provided that for free. It was a compression utility for Windows, using the standard compression algorithms.

Since then, they've developed some other products. One of them, which still exists, is a download manager, mostly for multimedia. They also developed functionality, parts of products that were developed in other groups. For example, we have a browser that was developed by our own group. They updated it to run on Mac.

In terms of technologies used, they mostly worked with Qt, which is a framework for cross-platform development. They also used Windows, C++. I guess the majority of the activity was in that area.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

Actually, this was something that was not handled directly by me. We had a few other employees at the time that coordinated most of the offshore work we did in Belarus. We have our own groups of developers in Belarus, and when we needed more, the connection was made with ScienceSoft. I assume it was using connections there through our local managers.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

We didn't hire them for a specific project. We hired the whole group for an ongoing period. We actually paid by the developer on a monthly basis. We stopped working with them last year and, at the time, I estimated that we were paying them about $15,000 a month.

What is the status of this engagement?

We worked with them for about six years. The official conclusion of our collaboration was January 2015, and I think we stopped a month before in December 2014.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

I guess the best benchmark is comparing their work with our own teams in Belarus. If we decided to develop a new product or a new model, I can compare their performance with the other teams and, in general, I can tell that they were one of the better teams. Usually, they met their deadlines, and the time it took them to develop things was relatively fast.

We distributed the products to millions of users worldwide because it's freeware. We always get feedback from the end-users, complaints when things don't work as expected, or reports about bugs. I cannot say that we received more or less complaints regarding their products relative to any other products. I think that the complaints were more related to the actual design of the product, the actual features of the product, and that was not their responsibility. They were responsible for the implementation following our specifications. I cannot give you anything specific – that they did a better or worse job.

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

The majority of their work was completed on time and within budget.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

I'm not that experienced with other providers that I can exactly say. I think that the strongest thing I can point out was that ScienceSoft's team leader was very technologically capable, and he was great at finding creative solutions and helping his team members to implement them. I think he was one of the key factors that lead to the success of the team.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

I don't have anything specific to tell you here. We used a single team. It was not a very large team, and we provided specifications, and they essentially provided the binaries. It was not a huge project. It was less an issue of relationship and management. We had a product manager, he would send them documents describing the product he wants, they would send us the estimates, and they'd deliver the binaries. I don't have very meaningful input regarding customer relationships.

One thing we didn't do very often, which was a mistake, was to meet with them from time to time. They are a group of great people, but when you meet with them, it helps them understand you better. They feel more related to your company and your objectives. I think it's always a problem with offshore development, that there is a separation. It's important to have face-to-face interactions with them because it helps establish a better rapport and it helps remove any degree of confusion regarding processes or objectives.

Please describe your organization.

We are a mobile video SSP [supply side platform]. We provide a platform for mobile video advertising for website servers, for in-app applications. We are in the ad tech industry.

What is your position?

I am the cofounder of the company.

What business challenge were you trying to address with ScienceSoft?

The project that they did for us was helping us with the development of a player for Android and iOS. The app was a smart player with HD [high-definition] support, so the end-user can watch any video on their mobile device as well as sending the video to their Smart TV and Chromecast.

Please describe the scope of their involvement.

We have since extended the scope of their involvement. ScienceSoft participated heavily in the main part of our mobile video SSP. It's our infrastructure for Edge Tech, its platform, its server, and exchange. They are and have been responsible for several parts of our custom platform.

ScienceSoft suggested people that would be suitable to work on our project, and each person was interviewed directly by our company to ensure they were a good fit. I believe the work with ScienceSoft is less than with regular outsourcing companies because the people are actually hired by us, we manage them and, if needed, we can exchange people or add additional members in the team.

From day one, we had several versions of control management tools, risk management, change management, bug trackers, and so on. We are a very organized company and, in order to manage them effectively, we use all these tools. We can see any progress in real time. If an issue comes up, we can see it on our dashboard.

How did you come to work with ScienceSoft?

I'm not entirely sure but it was likely through online research. We carefully evaluate all potential vendors to make sure we know what we're getting into.

Could you provide a sense of the size of this initiative in financial terms?

I can't, it is confidential, but it was quite a lot. We are talking about several hundred thousand dollars per year. We have a big team on their side.

What is the status of this engagement?

It's an ongoing project. For example, all or a part of our ad tech solutions, there are many milestones. Every two or three weeks, we have a different milestone and we manage them, so it's ongoing work. We consider ScienceSoft developers as a part of our team, and we manage them accordingly. They're like an additional branch of our company.

Could you share any statistics or metrics from this engagement?

For each application, we are talking about three to five releases each year, and for the bugs to be cited and shared internally. We are not using only their R&D [research and development] resources, we also have a QA [quality assurance] team in ScienceSoft. Actually, we have two types of QA. One is R&D QA, and one is product QA. Product QA is the more general QA with which I'm sure you're familiar. R&D QA is the QA person who works much more closely to R&D in order to help verify each feature that R&D completes and is ready to be tested in an actual product.

You can go to our website to see a few of our products. ScienceSoft helped with the full development of those products. They helped us release another product about two months ago. The product has been well received, and we had a lot of media coverage with it. They had a major involvement on the development of this new product type, which is a platform for sharing into different types of social networks.

You may be a user of Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ and you usually share a lot of content, but you never earn from your sharing. We developed an app that allows you to share any video content on the social network, while being able to include advertising video. This way, the person who shares the content starts to earn from them, becoming a direct publisher. This is another example of product that ScienceSoft helped us develop. 

How did ScienceSoft perform from a project management standpoint?

They were able to deliver all of their assigned work on time and within budget. Sometimes, some issues came up, but that is expected with every R&D project. Generally, they are good with respecting the timeframes and deadlines we set. We don't use them as a black box. It's very important to understand. In our case, we manage them directly, and I believe this is a big difference from other outsourcing companies. We don't send them projects as closed box/black box. We manage them with each step until we hit our mark. Some of our R&D project managers and team leaders are based here in our headquarters, and they work on the databases with them.

What distinguishes ScienceSoft from other providers?

I've been working with the people at ScienceSoft for many years, even before ScienceSoft was founded. ScienceSoft is very organized, they deliver on their promises, and I believe they have great resources. For example, when we need to hire a new professional, they do it. They put a lot of effort in professional knowledge and experience of their employees. They do monthly training for their engineers and QA teams, and this helps to promote the professionalism of their workers.

Is there anything ScienceSoft could have improved or done differently?

I've found that when you send a project to an outsourcing as a black box, you get many surprises at the end and, sometimes, things can't be undone so easily. When you manage the project and create milestones along the way, you will get much better results. One problem in the outsourcing industry is that when you give a project to an outsourcing company without product specifications, you'll get many surprises. I believe ScienceSoft is very good when they follow all the direct specifications you define.