It describes a product you stopped selling
The company pivoted, the pricing changed, two features died unannounced. The homepage did not notice. Sales spend the first call correcting an impression the site made for free.
Most B2B websites are designed by one company and built by another, and what ships is whatever survived the handover. Iryna does both, which removes the handover rather than improving it.
The work usually starts a couple of years after everyone inside agreed, privately, that the site was a problem. Nobody decided to let that happen. Changing it was simply never anybody’s job.
Eight years of it, mostly for companies selling something more complicated than their site was letting on.
Working out what the site is for and who it has to convince, before anyone opens a design tool. The hardest part, the least visible, and the one clients most often want to skip.
What goes on which page, in what order, and what gets cut. Most B2B sites aren’t badly designed so much as badly arranged, which is cheaper to fix and much harder to sell.
Typography, colour, hierarchy, and the diagrams that explain a product faster than a paragraph does. This is what decides whether a buyer takes you seriously, in about four seconds, which is unfair but reliable.
Front end and back end, in-house. Nothing gets lost in translation, mostly because there is no translation.
Everyone has an opinion about the website and nobody is responsible for it.
Marketing inherited it from a founder who built it over a weekend. Sales stopped sending the link and started sending decks. The product moved on twice and the homepage still describes the version from two years ago, because changing it means asking a developer with more urgent work.
So it stays as it is, losing the deals where somebody looked, decided you were smaller than you are, and never got in touch to say so. None of those show up in analytics, which is why the site never makes the roadmap.
For B2B companies that outgrew their website some time ago and have only recently started paying for it.
The company pivoted, the pricing changed, two features died unannounced. The homepage did not notice. Sales spend the first call correcting an impression the site made for free.
The clearest signal a website has failed. When the people paid to sell it route around it, that isn’t a design problem, it’s a verdict.
The product is ready for them and the site looks like a side project. Procurement notices before your champion does, and the deal slows for reasons nobody puts in writing.
A site your marketing team can’t edit drifts out of date at the speed your product changes, which is faster than anyone plans for. Almost always a build decision made by whoever was free at the time.
Investors read the site before the deck, and they read it the way a customer would. A site that undersells the company undersells the round.
No obvious fault, no obvious result. Usually positioning: the site describes what the product does rather than what it’s for, and those are different sentences.
Rebuilt, relaunched, and judged on the only test that counts here: whether sales went back to sending the link.
B2B website design is one of three services, and not always the right one.
When people reach the product and stop there, that’s UX design. When nobody can agree on what’s wrong, that’s consulting. The first call sorts out which – before any money changes hands.
Research, flows, wireframes, prototypes, UI. The whole problem – not just the part that fits neatly into a scope.
Audits, strategy, design direction, team feedback. The answer to what’s wrong – and occasionally, what to stop doing entirely.
Positioning, structure, visual design and graphics. Most products are better than their websites suggest.
Opinions about B2B websites, tested on real ones first.
The questions that come up before the first call. Most of them before anyone’s decided anything yet.
Both, and the build is rather the point. React, Laravel or WordPress, front and back end. A design handed to a third party arrives on the internet slightly different from how it left, and nobody involved can ever quite say when that happened.
That’s a requirement, not a nice-to-have. The CMS gets built for the people who’ll update it, and being needed for every heading change would be good business and bad work.
Usually. A brand that works in print often falls apart on a screen, and the fix is normally extension rather than replacement. If it genuinely needs rethinking, that’s a different conversation with a different number attached – UX consulting territory – better had before starting than halfway through.
It gets written here, unless you have someone better on hand. On a B2B site the writing is most of the design, and a layout built around copy that arrives later is a layout built around a guess.
It’ll be built so it can, which is a different promise. Structure, speed and pages that answer real questions are within anyone’s control. Outranking a competitor with a four-year head start is not, and anyone who promises you that is guessing. This studio included.
Then you get part of it. Positioning without a build is common and useful. Design without positioning is possible, usually a waste, and gets talked out of more often than sold. If the broken thing turns out to be the product rather than the site, that’s UX design instead.