Work & Co vs Nomensa: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Nomensa (3.9/5) edges ahead of Work & Co (3.8/5) overall. Nomensa is the better choice for Government, banking, healthcare — accessibility built in. Work & Co is the stronger option for premium brands, design plus production-grade engineering. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Work & Co vs Nomensa: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | Nomensa |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 2001 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | Bristol, UK (also London and Amsterdam) |
| Team size | 425+ | 100+ |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaced its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model | Built around accessibility and psychology-informed UX from its 2001 founding, now one of Europe's largest specialist UX agencies at 100+ people |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Project-based (not published) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, React, Next.js | Figma, Sketch, Adobe Creative Suite |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, EdTech |
Work & Co vs Nomensa: overview
Work & Co
Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo launched Work & Co from Dumbo, Brooklyn in May 2013. Offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe followed, but headcount (roughly 425) never caught up with the client list — Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, and Disney have all hired this team, largely because design and front-end engineering happen inside the same group. Accenture Song acquired Work & Co in 2023.
Nomensa
Simon Norris, Sally Lincoln, and Alastair Campbell founded Nomensa in 2001 around a specific combination: psychology, user-centered design, and accessibility. Now running from Bristol, London, and Amsterdam with 100+ people, the company calls itself one of Europe's largest specialist UX agencies, serving banking, e-commerce, education, entertainment, government, and healthcare clients. Accessibility isn't an add-on service here — auditing, testing, training, and consultancy sit alongside standard UX design work.
Services and capabilities: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Capability | Work & Co | Nomensa |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | Nomensa |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Criterion | Work & Co | Nomensa |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Dimension | Work & Co | Nomensa |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, EdTech |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Government or public-sector digital accessibility compliance, Banking or healthcare UX requiring built-in accessibility auditing |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Work & Co vs Nomensa: pros and cons
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to headcount |
| + | Design and engineering under one roof cuts the hand-off risk of splitting vendors |
| + | 425+ people across the US, Europe, and Latin America give real multi-region capacity |
| + | Consistent record shipping flagship consumer digital products |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, which shares a parent with the Accenture Song entry elsewhere in this list |
| - | A premium client base implies premium pricing even without a published minimum |
| - | Less vertical specialization (fintech, healthcare-specific) than boutiques built around one niche |
| Nomensa | |
|---|---|
| + | Accessibility expertise built into the practice since 2001, not added later as a compliance afterthought |
| + | 100+ people across Bristol, London, and Amsterdam is a genuinely large specialist UX team |
| + | Serves banking, e-commerce, education, government, and healthcare — sectors where accessibility compliance matters most |
| + | Independently founded and still operating under its original leadership focus |
| - | Accessibility-and-psychology specialization may be a narrower fit for clients whose priority is pure visual design |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
| - | European office footprint (Bristol, London, Amsterdam) offers less overlap with US or APAC business hours |
Who should choose Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
A client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaced its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
Who should choose Nomensa?
A typical fit: government or public-sector digital accessibility compliance.
Built around accessibility and psychology-informed UX from its 2001 founding, now one of Europe's largest specialist UX agencies at 100+ people. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, EdTech.
Decision matrix: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Work & Co |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Work & Co (Not published) vs Nomensa (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Work & Co |
| 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: Work & Co vs Nomensa
| Use case | Work & Co fit | Nomensa fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Government or public-sector digital accessibility compliance | Limited | Strong | Nomensa |
| Banking or healthcare UX requiring built-in accessibility auditing | Limited | Strong | Nomensa |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Work & Co vs Nomensa
Nomensa (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. Built around accessibility and psychology-informed UX from its 2001 founding, now one of Europe's largest specialist UX agencies at 100+ people.
Work & Co (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need e-commerce platform rebuild with heavy front-end engineering. If your situation matches that, Work & Co is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Work & Co vs Nomensa FAQ
Is Work & Co better than Nomensa?
Nomensa (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Work & Co's strongest advantage: client roster (Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney) is exceptional relative to headcount. Nomensa's strongest advantage: accessibility expertise built into the practice since 2001, not added later as a compliance afterthought.
How do Work & Co and Nomensa differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Nomensa uses project-based (not published) 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: Work & Co or Nomensa?
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 company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Work & Co and Nomensa?
Work & Co's primary differentiator is: a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) that outpaced its ~425-person headcount, delivered through an engineering-heavy design-and-build model. Nomensa's primary differentiator is: built around accessibility and psychology-informed UX from its 2001 founding, now one of Europe's largest specialist UX agencies at 100+ people. They also differ in team size (425+ vs 100+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Financial services / fintech, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.