B2B SaaS product design agency for AI-era teams

Other Land needs three things in the first days. Access to the product with a working account and to your analytics, one person who can answer questions without scheduling a meeting, and a shared view of the three things that matter most this quarter. After that, one call a week and async replies are enough.

What slows engagements down is rarely a lack of documentation. It is waiting on approval from someone who is never in the thread. If a decision needs a specific person, we would rather know their name in week one than discover it in week four.

Three people. Other Land puts an AI-native product designer matched to your product on the daily work, and keeps two more people behind them. A design lead reviews it, keeps the quality steady, and steps in when a problem is bigger than one person. A PM holds scope, cadence, and the boring parts, so nobody on your side has to manage us.

You pay one monthly fee for all three, not three rates. If we do not have the right designer free for your domain, we say so instead of sending whoever is on the bench.

Findings in week one, designed work in week two or three, and metric movement when it ships. The first week produces a read on where the product loses users, with the problems ranked. Weeks two and three produce flows you can review and hand to engineering.

After that the timeline stops being ours: numbers move on your release cadence, so if you ship weekly, expect signal in four to six weeks, and if you ship quarterly it is longer. We would rather say that upfront than promise a date we do not control. If the goal is one specific metric, growth design is the closer fit.

Other Land works in weekly sprints, with everything visible as it happens. Monday we agree what the week produces. Midweek you get async updates in your channel rather than a status report. Friday we review the work together and adjust the next scope.

We work in your Jira or Linear, your Slack, your Figma organisation and your design system. We design in Figma, build in Claude Code or Cursor, or both, matched to your team, and design leadership reviews every screen before you see it. Nothing is saved up for a reveal at the end of the month.

One call a week and roughly two hours in total. The call runs thirty to sixty minutes, with your PM or product owner and whoever else needs to be in it. The rest is async: questions answered in a thread, work reviewed with comments in Figma.

The first two weeks are heavier, closer to three or four hours, because that is when we are learning your product and its rules. After that it settles. If your team is stretched, say so on the intro call and we will pull more of the discovery from analytics and the product itself, and less from interviews.

By separating two things that get confused. Domain complexity is real and stays. Your product is complicated because the work it supports is complicated. Interface complexity is a choice, usually the accumulation of years of additions that each made sense on their own.

Other Land keeps every capability and changes what is on screen first, what waits behind a click, what has a sane default, and what is named in your users' language rather than your database's. Sequencing, hierarchy, and progressive disclosure do most of the work. And because we stay on the front end, nothing underneath has to move. A UX audit is the usual starting point.

Other Land bills two ways, both simple monthly fees. Weekly sprints suit scoped work up to about three months, where you pay monthly for the weeks we work. Full-time involvement means a dedicated designer joins your team at a fixed monthly rate, similar to a salary.

One monthly fee covers your designer and the design lead and PM who back them. After the intro call you get a written estimate with scope and cost. The minimum commitment is four weeks.