We kept seeing the same pattern: teams investing 50-100k in products that nobody ends up using. Clean code, beautiful design, solid architecture – and then launch day where the core assumption never held up with real users. The code wasn't the problem. The decisions before the code were. Tobias came from a company that spent six figures on a product that almost nobody used. Janni had the same story from multiple client projects over nine years of development work. Jacqueline kept seeing designers polish pixels on features that shouldn't have existed. The pain was real and repetitive. The core problem: most teams treat the "what to build" phase as something you power through to reach the "real work" of coding. But that's where most projects actually succeed or fail. Teams don't have bad developers – they have unvalidated assumptions. When we started building decivo, our initial plan was a classic agency setup with hourly rates and flexible scope. That fell apart quickly. Hourly rates incentivize longer projects, not better outcomes. Flexible scope means the client pays for our uncertainty. So we pivoted to fixed-price modular packages tied to validated outcomes. The second evolution was AI-native workflows. We didn't want to be "an agency that uses AI" – we wanted AI to be the backbone of how we deliver. That meant building a 12-phase workflow where Claude Code, Figma, and our own skill templates work together. AI generates the first draft, humans validate at every gate, and the final output is measurably better than what either could produce alone. The biggest mindset shift: realizing we're not selling code. We're selling the confidence that you're building the right thing before you spend real money on it.

decivo

Validate product ideas in days, not months

Validate product ideas in days, not months