One name on the work
Anupam Shah reviews what ships. That is the product — the capacity is the easy half, and an unreviewed pull request is negative output no matter who wrote it.
Engineering capacity that arrives reviewed.
Most augmentation gives you a person and makes their output your problem. You interview them, you onboard them, you review their pull requests, and when the code is wrong you find out in your own production.
We attach the review to the capacity. Work lands checked before it reaches your branch, and one named person is accountable for it — not a coordinator, not an account manager.
That is the whole difference. IT staff augmentation services are usually priced and sold as headcount: a rate, a seat, a start date. The rate is the easy part to compare and the wrong thing to compare, because two engineers at the same rate produce very different amounts of work you can actually merge.
We can describe our toolchain in writing, including where AI is used and where it is not. Procurement has started asking, and disclosure rules are now live in US state and federal contracting. You get that answer before you have to ask for it, and you own the output outright — the same as any other work you commission.
Talk to Anupam →Fixed fee, scoped in writing before anything starts. No hourly billing, no verbal scope.
How it works
What you are actually buying from a staff augmentation company.
Scope, not seats
Priced against a written scope, milestone-billed as verified work lands. No hourly rate, no timesheets, no minimum engagement length to argue about later.
Yours, unambiguously
Written IP assignment before repo access, never after. Signed by everyone who touches the code. You own the output, including anything produced with AI assistance.
What we will not promise
No 24/7 cover, no incident SLA, no guaranteed same-week replacement — those need a rota we do not staff. If your contract restricts AI-assisted code or requires warranties from our tool vendors' own suppliers, raise it on the first call: some of those we can meet in writing and some we cannot, and you should know which before you shortlist us.
What buyers ask before they book.
What is the difference between staff augmentation and outsourcing?
Direction. In staff augmentation you set the priorities and the engineers work inside your process, your repo, your definition of done. In outsourcing you agree a deliverable and the vendor decides how to produce it. The practical test is who decides what gets worked on next week. There is a longer breakdown, including managed services and consulting, in our guide to staff augmentation.
How much do staff augmentation services cost?
Published market rates vary enormously by region — roughly $20–45/hr for South and Southeast Asia through to $80–150+ for US onshore — and most vendors publish nothing at all. We price against written scope rather than per seat or per hour, so the comparison we would rather you make is total cost against delivered work, not rate against rate. The hire-vs-engage model has the full arithmetic, including the seven costs people leave out.
Is this team extension or a separate team?
Team extension — engineers work inside your process rather than beside it. That is the point of the model and it is also its main cost: it assumes you have someone internal with real capacity to direct the work. If nobody does, you do not want capacity at all, you want someone accountable for a deliverable, which is a different purchase.
Who owns the code and the IP?
You do, unambiguously. Written IP assignment is signed before repository access is granted, never after, by everyone who touches the code — including anything produced with AI assistance. Seven of the ten highest-ranking pages in this category never mention IP ownership at all, which is worth noticing while you compare vendors.
How do you vet the engineers?
The honest answer is that vetting is the wrong question to optimise. Every firm in this category claims a top-1-to-3% acceptance rate and none of them publishes the denominator. What actually determines whether the code is good is who reviews it before it merges, and that is the thing we will name a person for.
What if someone is not working out?
Raise it early and we will fix it or end it. We do not offer a guaranteed same-week replacement, because that needs a rota this team does not staff and we will not promise capacity we cannot cover. What you do get: written scope, milestone billing so you are never paid up ahead of delivered work, and 30 days notice either way.
Do your engineers use AI coding tools?
Yes, and we will describe the toolchain in writing — which tools touch your code, what they see, what is retained, and who reviews the output before it reaches your branch. If your procurement restricts AI-assisted code, or needs warranties from our tool vendors' own suppliers, raise it on the first call. Some of those we can meet in writing and some we structurally cannot, and you should know which before you shortlist us.
Tell us what needs building. We'll tell you if we're the wrong shop.
Founder · replies same business day
Book a call →
Fixed fee, scoped in writing before anything starts. No hourly billing, no verbal scope.
Related: What is staff augmentation? · Hire vs engage a firm: a cost model · AI consulting & implementation · AI workflow automation · How we work · About Anupam Shah