R/GA vs Work & Co: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Work & Co (3.9/5) edges ahead of R/GA (3.7/5) overall. Work & Co is the better choice for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering.. R/GA is the stronger option for global consumer or enterprise brands that want product design bundled with marketing-led brand strategy.. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
R/GA vs Work & Co: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | R/GA | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1977 | 2013 |
| HQ | New York City, NY, USA | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA |
| Team size | ~2,000 | 425+ |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Best for | Global consumer or enterprise brands that want product design bundled with marketing-led brand strategy. | Premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering. |
| Pricing model | Project-based, retainer for ongoing programs | Fixed project, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, After Effects | Figma, React, Next.js |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare |
R/GA vs Work & Co: overview
R/GA
R/GA was founded in 1977 in New York City and now operates across ten countries including Austin, London, São Paulo, Singapore, and Stockholm. After 23 years inside Interpublic Group, R/GA completed an independent buyout in March 2025 backed by private equity firm Truelink Capital — a recent structural change worth disclosing. Its differentiator is fusing digital product design with marketing and brand strategy, which shows up in strong enterprise and consumer platform work for large, recognizable brands.
Work & Co
Work & Co was founded in May 2013 by Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo, and is based in Dumbo, Brooklyn with offices spanning the US, Latin America, and Europe. Its client list — Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, and Disney — is unusually strong for a 425-person studio, reflecting its engineering-heavy delivery model where design and front-end build happen under one roof. Work & Co is now part of Accenture Song, an ownership detail worth disclosing alongside its design credentials.
Services and capabilities: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Capability | R/GA | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Framework / platform | R/GA | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Criterion | R/GA | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Dimension | R/GA | Work & Co |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | Consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch, Enterprise digital product with a marketing/campaign component | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
R/GA vs Work & Co: pros and cons
| R/GA | |
|---|---|
| + | Combines product design with marketing and brand strategy, useful when a client needs both from one vendor |
| + | Presence in ten countries spans North America, Europe, Latin America, and APAC |
| + | Nearly five decades of case studies and enterprise brand relationships |
| + | Now independently owned following its March 2025 buyout, after 23 years inside Interpublic Group |
| - | Still stabilizing operationally after a recent (2025) private-equity-backed ownership change |
| - | Marketing-first positioning means less pure product-design specialization than boutique studios |
| - | Scale and pricing suit large-brand budgets more than early-stage product teams |
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) punches well above the studio's headcount |
| + | Design and engineering under one roof reduces the hand-off risk of splitting vendors |
| + | 425+ people across the US, Europe, and Latin America give real multi-region delivery capacity |
| + | Consistent track record shipping flagship consumer digital products |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, which shares a parent with the Accenture Song entry elsewhere in this roster |
| - | Its premium client base implies premium pricing even though no minimum is published |
| - | Less vertical specialization (fintech, healthcare-specific) than boutiques built around one niche |
Who should choose R/GA?
R/GA is the right choice for global consumer or enterprise brands that want product design bundled with marketing-led brand strategy..
Blends product design with marketing and brand strategy in one team, now operating independently after its 2025 buyout from IPG. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment.
Who should choose Work & Co?
Work & Co is the right choice for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
An engineering-led delivery model backing a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its headcount. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | R/GA |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: R/GA (Not published) vs Work & Co (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | R/GA |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: R/GA vs Work & Co
| Use case | R/GA fit | Work & Co fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Enterprise digital product with a marketing/campaign component | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Limited | Strong | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Limited | Strong | Work & Co |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: R/GA vs Work & Co
Work & Co (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. An engineering-led delivery model backing a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its headcount. It is best for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
R/GA (3.7/5) is the better choice when global consumer or enterprise brands that want product design bundled with marketing-led brand strategy.. If your situation matches those criteria, R/GA is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
R/GA vs Work & Co FAQ
Is R/GA better than Work & Co?
Work & Co (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. R/GA is better for global consumer or enterprise brands that want product design bundled with marketing-led brand strategy.. Work & Co is better for premium consumer and enterprise brands wanting design paired tightly with production-grade front-end engineering..
How do R/GA and Work & Co differ in pricing?
R/GA uses project-based, retainer for ongoing programs pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: R/GA or Work & Co?
R/GA is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each agency before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between R/GA and Work & Co?
R/GA's primary differentiator is: blends product design with marketing and brand strategy in one team, now operating independently after its 2025 buyout from ipg. Work & Co's primary differentiator is: an engineering-led delivery model backing a client roster (apple, ikea, nike, disney) unusually strong for its headcount. They also differ in team size (~2,000 vs 425+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Consumer products, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.