Software development partner for ongoing delivery
HED Creative works with companies that do not want an agency for campaigns and a software shop for tickets. A monthly capacity or a closed-scope project — the same ownership. This is not a staff-augmentation catalogue. It is an external partner that stays with the running software.
Why companies look for an external development partner
The internal team is full, freelancers rotate every sprint, the agency disappears after launch, the software house produces tickets without a business outcome. Outsourcing often means cheap hands. What is sought here is continuity, context and someone who owns the running application — not a poster of ten rented developers.
Knowledge sticks to people
When the vendor changes, the architecture leaves with them. The next supplier sells the same discovery again.
A ticket pile, no outcome
The list grows. At month end you see activity, not the stalled work.
Internal IT is bypassed
The outside team ignores environments, rights and standards. Every invoice reopens the security argument.
A gap after go-live
Delivery ends. Care sits in another contract, another head.
What partnership means here
Two models: monthly capacity or a closed project. Both start with discovery and a written boundary. Taking over existing code is possible; a blind takeover is not. If internal IT exists, rights and environments are split. The aim is not lock-in. It is that the software does not sit without an owner.
Internal team or external partner
An external software partner is useful when the internal team is full, not yet built, or an existing application has no owner. The partner does not replace IT leadership. A retainer carries care and evolution; a project carries a defined delivery. Mixing them inflates both cost and diagnosis. The two models are set out separately on the working-models page.
What the partner takes on
Ongoing development
Prioritised work. Not an opaque backlog performance.
Care of what already runs
Security, defects, small evolution — without inventing a new product.
Work with internal IT
Environments, review, rights. The partner does not have to replace the internal team.
Continuity after delivery
The same people can move into care. Re-onboarding cost is avoided on purpose.
Integration ownership
APIs are not “set up once” and forgotten.
Web and software in one hand
Portal, site and internal app do not have to split across three vendors.
When this model comes up
The product team is at capacity
Work queues, hiring is slow. The partner puts a measurable capacity in place of a job ad.
Agency and software shop are split
The site in one place, the app in another, integration nowhere. One owner is often cheaper than five contracts.
An application with no owner
The old vendor left, the code remains. Read and risk first, then a small phase — no forced rewrite.
IT is not built yet
The company wants software outside, but not every job with a new freelancer.
Who this is for
- Companies whose internal development is full or should stay small
- IT managers who need to steer external capacity
- Teams that must keep an existing application alive
- Buyers of software outsourcing who want ownership, not dumping prices
What the partnership changes
- Continuity. Context does not reset on every invoice.
- Visible priority. The month’s work and risk stay inspectable.
- External capacity without an IT fight. Rights and environments are settled first.
- No hole after launch. The same team can move into care.
How we attach
First the stack and the model (retainer or project). The contract follows discovery.
Intake
Code, systems, internal capacity, the stalled work. No order.
Model
Monthly capacity or closed scope. The two are not mixed.
Boundary and access
Environments, rights, communication, what stays out.
First window
Short, visible work. Partnership does not start with a leap of faith.
Rhythm
Priority, delivery, risk — readable each month.
Review
Capacity up, down, or the project ends. No silent lock-in.
Technical frame
Where we build new, web and applications use Next.js and TypeScript. Existing stacks — ERP, CRM, a legacy app — we read in discovery. There is no claim to master every framework. Language and condition of the code decide whether phase one is realistic.
What this partnership is built on
Ownership
Not ticket volume — the stalled work and the next step.
Berlin and Ankara
Legal seat in Berlin. Delivery from Berlin and Ankara. No invented nearshore headcount.
Internal IT stays in charge
Where it exists, we share — we do not overrun.
An exit remains possible
Code and context stay with the company.
Questions before a decision
Can you take over an existing application?
After we have seen the code and access. No blind takeover, no forced rewrite.
Can you work with internal IT?
Yes. Rights and environments are shared.
Can we start small?
Yes. The first window tests the working relationship without inflating it.
Is a retainer mandatory?
No. Project delivery exists; continuity is a choice.
How the partnership is set up
How is a partner different from software outsourcing?
Outsourcing often sells hours. A partner owns the running system, the priority and the time after launch.
Do you provide a dedicated team?
We do not rent a named bench. A core attaches to the need — no shop-window packs of ten developers.
Retainer or project?
Capacity for care and evolution; a project for a clear delivery. Mixing them inflates both.
How does the contract start?
Discovery, a written boundary, access. The first conversation is not a purchase.
Are web and software separate?
They do not have to be. Portal, site and internal app can sit in one ownership.
Related pages
Tell us what sits outside the company without an owner
An application, an integration or ongoing development — a short note is enough for a practical next step.
Describe the partnership you need
The current stack, internal capacity and the stalled work are enough. This is not an order for a bench of developers.
We separate retainer from closed-scope project first. Then we discuss access, boundary and the first working window.