R/GA vs Work & Co: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
R/GA (3.8/5) edges ahead of Work & Co (3.8/5) overall. R/GA is the better choice for large brands that want product design and marketing from one partner. Work & Co is the stronger option for premium brands, design paired with strong engineering. 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 | ~400 (at the 2024 Accenture acquisition) |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Pairs product design with brand and marketing strategy, and since going independent has been buying and building AI design capability | An engineering-heavy studio whose client list (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) outsizes its ~400-person team, now part of Accenture Song |
| 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
Since buying itself back from Interpublic Group in March 2025, with majority backing from Truelink Capital, R/GA has moved quickly. It set up a $50M innovation fund, launched a global AI products team, and made the first acquisition in its nearly 50-year history: Addition, an AI system design studio. In September 2026 it hired former Google executive Sadie Thoma as its first global chief business officer. The agency has run out of New York since 1977 and now works from ten countries, including Austin, London, São Paulo, Singapore, and Stockholm. Product design still arrives bundled with brand and marketing strategy.
Work & Co
Five co-founders started Work & Co in Dumbo, Brooklyn, in May 2013: Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo. Its client list is out of proportion to its size. Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, and Disney have all hired a studio of roughly 400 people, largely because designers and front-end engineers ship together on the same team. Accenture announced its acquisition in January 2024, and the studio now operates within Accenture Song while keeping its own brand and careers site.
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 or campaign component | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
R/GA vs Work & Co: pros and cons
| R/GA | |
|---|---|
| + | Product design and marketing strategy come from one team, which saves large brands a second vendor |
| + | Acquired AI system design studio Addition, its first acquisition, funded from a $50M innovation fund |
| + | Offices in ten countries across North America, Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific |
| + | Leadership bench keeps growing after the buyout, including a first global chief business officer hired in September 2026 |
| - | Ownership changed in 2025 and the AI products team is new, so ask how much of that capability would touch your project |
| - | Trade-press reports of 25% year-on-year revenue growth in Q1 2026 come from the agency itself |
| - | Marketing-led positioning and large-brand pricing fit early-stage product teams poorly |
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client list of Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, and Disney is rare for a studio of about 400 people |
| + | Designers and engineers ship together, so there's no hand-off to a separate build vendor |
| + | Offices across the US, Europe, and Latin America |
| + | Long record of flagship consumer launches |
| - | Part of Accenture Song since Accenture's 2024 acquisition, the same parent as the Accenture Song listing here |
| - | No published minimum, though the client list points to premium pricing |
| - | Fewer fintech- or healthcare-specific case studies than vertical specialists |
Who should choose R/GA?
A typical fit: consumer platform redesign tied to a brand relaunch.
Pairs product design with brand and marketing strategy, and since going independent has been buying and building AI design capability. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment.
Who should choose Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
An engineering-heavy studio whose client list (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) outsizes its ~400-person team, now part of Accenture Song. 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 or campaign component | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Limited | Strong | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild requiring 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
R/GA (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. Pairs product design with brand and marketing strategy, and since going independent has been buying and building AI design capability.
Work & Co (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need e-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering. If your situation matches that, Work & Co is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
R/GA vs Work & Co FAQ
Is R/GA better than Work & Co?
R/GA (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. R/GA's strongest advantage: product design and marketing strategy come from one team, which saves large brands a second vendor. Work & Co's strongest advantage: client list of Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, and Disney is rare for a studio of about 400 people.
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?
Work & Co 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: pairs product design with brand and marketing strategy, and since going independent has been buying and building AI design capability. Work & Co's primary differentiator is: an engineering-heavy studio whose client list (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) outsizes its ~400-person team, now part of Accenture Song. They also differ in team size (~2,000 vs ~400 (at the 2024 Accenture acquisition)), 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.