
Fixing a usability issue during prototyping costs $1. Fixing the same issue during development costs $10. Fixing it after launch costs $100. Interactive prototypes let you discover and resolve design problems at the cheapest possible stage. We build Figma prototypes that simulate your actual product — complete with navigation, form flows, transitions, and real content — so you can test with users and present to stakeholders before a developer touches the codebase.
Teams skip prototyping for a common reason: it feels like extra time before 'real' work begins. So they jump from wireframes (or worse, verbal descriptions) straight to development. Two months and $50,000 later, user testing reveals that the checkout flow confuses everyone, the dashboard layout hides critical data, and the navigation model doesn't scale.
Now the development team faces a choice: ship a product with known usability problems, or rewrite significant portions of the frontend. Both options cost more than the prototype would have.
This pattern repeats across the industry. IBM's research shows that every dollar invested in UX returns up to $100, and the majority of that return comes from catching issues early. A two-week prototyping phase typically saves 4-8 weeks of development rework. The math is straightforward: prototyping is the cheapest insurance against building the wrong thing.

Our prototypes are not static clickthrough mockups. They're fully interactive Figma prototypes that simulate the actual user experience: page transitions, scroll behaviors, form validation feedback, hover states, and conditional paths. When a user tests the prototype, they interact with something that feels like a real application.
We prototype at different fidelity levels depending on the project stage. Low-fidelity wireframe prototypes test information architecture and navigation structure. Mid-fidelity prototypes validate content hierarchy and user flows. High-fidelity prototypes with visual design confirm the complete experience before development.
Every prototype is built for testing. We define test scenarios, recruit representative users (or use your existing audience), run moderated or unmoderated sessions, and analyze the results with task completion rates, error frequencies, and qualitative feedback. The prototype evolves based on what we learn, not what we assume.
Define the critical user journeys to prototype: onboarding, core feature, conversion flow, and error recovery paths. Map the screens needed and the connections between them. Identify the hypotheses each prototype should test.
Build interactive screens in Figma with real content (not lorem ipsum), navigation connections, form interactions, transition animations, and conditional logic. The prototype matches your chosen fidelity level: wireframe, mid-fi, or high-fi.
Run usability tests with 5-8 representative users. Tasks-based testing measures completion rate, time on task, and error frequency. Think-aloud protocol captures qualitative insights about confusion points and expectations.
Compile test results into a findings report with severity-ranked issues and design recommendations. Iterate on the prototype to resolve critical usability problems. Deliver the validated prototype with test documentation for your development team.
No commitments. Tell us what you need and we'll tell you how we'd solve it.
Challenge: Pre-seed startup needs to validate product concept with potential users and present a tangible demo to investors before committing to development
Solution: High-fidelity Figma prototype of the core user journey with real content, transitions, and interactive states. Usability testing with 8 target users. Results report for investor pitch.
Result: Validated core assumption (70% of test users completed the primary task) and identified two critical flow changes before a single line of code was written
Challenge: Large internal tool used by 500+ employees needs redesign, but the team can't afford to disrupt daily operations with an untested new interface
Solution: Prototype of key workflows in new design, tested with representative users from each department. Side-by-side task completion comparison between current and proposed design.
Result: New design achieved 30% faster task completion in testing. Stakeholder buy-in secured with quantitative evidence before development began.
Challenge: 68% cart abandonment rate on a Shopify store with $2M annual revenue — small conversion improvements would yield significant revenue gains
Solution: Three prototype variants of the checkout flow: single-page, multi-step, and accordion. Each tested with 10 users measuring completion rate, error frequency, and perceived ease.
Result: Winning variant showed 23% higher completion rate in testing. Implemented change recovered an estimated $280K in annual revenue from abandoned carts.
Designs built in Figma with developer handoff specs that translate directly to Tailwind CSS 4 utility classes. Prototypes use real data structures matching Payload CMS 3 content models — what you approve in design is exactly what gets built.
AI-assisted user research analysis, heatmap interpretation, and A/B test design using Claude and GPT-4o. We analyze user behavior patterns at scale to inform design decisions — not just follow trends, but validate them with data.
Design systems delivered as code — Tailwind CSS component libraries, not just Figma files. Your team can implement designs without waiting for designers. Living style guides hosted on your infrastructure, always in sync with production.
From user research and wireframes through high-fidelity design to developer handoff and QA — one team handles everything. The designer who interviews your users also creates the interface and reviews the implementation.
Fixed-price design projects with approval gates: research, wireframes, visual design, prototype. You review and approve each phase. No hourly billing that incentivizes slow delivery.
An interactive prototype is a clickable simulation of your product built in Figma or ProtoPie. Users can navigate between screens, interact with forms, trigger transitions, and complete workflows — it looks and behaves like a real application. The difference from actual software is that no code is written. This makes it fast to create (days instead of weeks), cheap to change, and ideal for testing assumptions before committing to development.
A core-flow prototype covering 3-5 key screens with navigation starts at $3,000-$6,000. Comprehensive prototypes with full user journeys, multiple paths, and edge case handling range from $6,000-$15,000. Adding usability testing with recruited participants adds $2,000-$5,000 for recruitment, facilitation, and analysis. The investment is a fraction of the development cost it prevents.
A focused core-flow prototype takes 1-2 weeks. A comprehensive prototype covering multiple user journeys takes 2-3 weeks. Adding usability testing requires an additional 1-2 weeks for recruitment, sessions, and analysis. For time-sensitive projects (investor demos, board presentations), we offer accelerated 5-day prototyping sprints.
Describe your product concept or redesign challenge. We'll scope a prototype that tests your riskiest assumptions and delivers evidence your team can act on.
Core prototype in 1-2 weeks · Usability testing included · Figma developer handoff
The right fidelity depends on what you need to validate. Low-fidelity wireframe prototypes are best for testing navigation structure and information architecture. Mid-fidelity prototypes with layout and content validate user flows and feature prioritization. High-fidelity prototypes with visual design test the complete experience. We recommend starting low and increasing fidelity as you validate each layer.
Figma prototypes include built-in developer handoff features: CSS properties, spacing measurements, asset exports, and component specifications. For complex interactions built in ProtoPie, we provide interaction specification documents with timing, easing, and trigger details. Our developers regularly receive these handoffs and build production interfaces that match the prototype behavior exactly.
Jakob Nielsen's research shows that 5 users uncover approximately 85% of usability problems. We typically test with 5-8 users per round. For quantitative validation (comparing two variants with statistical significance), we recommend 15-20 users per variant. Remote unmoderated testing through Maze can reach larger sample sizes quickly when quantitative data is the priority.