"Make it pretty" is the wrong brief
Most design engagements start with the wrong instruction. A founder looks at a dated product, feels the embarrassment, and asks for it to be made to look modern. But "looks dated" is rarely the real problem — it is the symptom people can see. Underneath it the navigation is confusing, the signup flow leaks users at step three, and the screen everyone actually lives in was never designed at all, just assembled.
Good design is not decoration applied at the end. It is the structure of how people understand and move through your product, and the clarity of the moment you ask them to act. Make that right and "modern" comes almost for free. Make it pretty without fixing it and you have a beautiful product that still loses users where it always did.
That is the brief we actually work to: design that makes the product clearer to use and more likely to convert — and that ships, instead of dying in a Figma file nobody can build.
What Naxdor design does differently
Three things separate the way we design from a typical agency or freelancer engagement:
- It is research-led, not taste-led. We start from your users, your goals, and your funnel — not a moodboard. Decisions are anchored to what the product needs to do, so we can defend them with reasons rather than opinions.
- It is delivered as a system, not a pile of screens. You get a tokenized component library in Figma — colors, type, spacing, and components defined once and reused — so the design is consistent by construction and cheap to extend later.
- It is built to ship. The design system is tokenized the same way engineering builds, so handoff is not a guessing game. If we build the product with you, design and engineering pair directly; if another team builds it, the system is structured so they can.
These are the floor. The product thinking above them — which flows to prioritize, where to reduce friction, how to make the key action obvious — is where the engagement earns its keep.
What you get at the starting price
Refer to the price card on this page for the included scope at USD $4,000 starting. In short: stakeholder research and an information architecture, wireframes and then visual design across your core screens and flows, a tokenized Figma component library, two rounds of revisions with final assets exported and documented, and designer-engineer pairing during implementation if you build with us.
Two things worth setting straight:
- The starting price designs the core, done well. It covers research, IA, and visual design across a focused set of key screens or flows — enough to set the system and the most important journeys. A sprawling product with dozens of unique screens is a larger engagement, and we scope it as one.
- Scope and testing are the price levers. How large the design system is, how many key flows we design, and whether we run usability testing move the number. We tell you which of those your product actually needs now on the first call.
The handoff problem we exist to solve
The single most expensive failure in design is the gap between the Figma file and the running product. A designer hands off pixel-perfect mockups, an engineer rebuilds them by eye, and the result is "close enough" — spacing that drifts, colors that are almost right, components that behave differently on every screen. Months later the design system exists in two places that disagree.
We close that gap by designing the way the code is built. The Figma library is tokenized — every color, type size, and spacing step is a named token that maps directly onto the design tokens engineering uses. Components are defined once and composed, exactly as they are in the codebase. When we also build the product, the design ships into the same system that consumes it, so there is no translation layer to lose meaning in. This is why our design holds up after launch instead of decaying into "the design we used to have."
How we work
A design engagement moves through four stages.
Research (1 week)
We interview stakeholders, review your analytics and funnel, and map who uses the product and what they are trying to do. We define the information architecture — the structure underneath the screens — because getting that right is what makes everything above it feel obvious.
Wireframe (1–2 weeks)
Low-fidelity structure first, so we argue about flow and hierarchy before anyone debates a color. Wireframes make the cheap mistakes cheap — it is far less expensive to move a step in a wireframe than to rebuild a finished screen.
Visual design (2–3 weeks)
Then the visual layer, in working sessions you attend live — not email-only reviews. We design the core screens and build the tokenized component library as we go, so the system and the screens grow together. Two rounds of revisions are included.
Handoff and build (ongoing)
Final assets are exported and documented. If you build with us, design and engineering pair through implementation so the shipped product matches the design. If your team builds it, the system is structured and documented so they can do the same.
UX, UI, and brand — what we do and don't
These three get blurred constantly, so to be precise:
- UX is how the product is structured and how people move through it — the part that decides whether it works.
- UI is the visual layer on top — the part that decides whether it feels considered and trustworthy.
- Brand identity — your logo, your full visual identity system, your name and voice — is a different discipline.
We do UX and UI within an existing brand. We do not create brand identities from scratch — that belongs with a dedicated brand studio, and we will recommend one. If your brand assets are not ready, we can work to a minimal interim kit so design is not blocked, and update once a real identity lands.
What we don't build
Honesty about scope is half the value of a service page. For Naxdor design, the most common asks we do not take at the starting price:
- Full brand identity. Logo design and a complete visual identity system belong with a brand studio.
- Ongoing design-on-tap. Continuous design support folds into a retainer rather than the project starting price.
- Pixel-pushing an existing design we can't question. If the brief is "rebuild this exactly, do not change anything," we are the wrong fit — our value is in the thinking, not just the rendering.
Where to next
If you are scoping a real design engagement, the right next step is a 30-minute discovery call. We learn what the product needs to do and where it is losing people, you learn whether we are the right partner, and within three business days you get either a written scope or an honest referral.
If you are earlier in the decision, request a free 30-minute audit — we will look at your current product or site and tell you candidly what is worth redesigning and what is fine as-is. No pitch attached.
Either way, see the rest of what we ship, with starting prices, on the pricing page.