Should I decide based on UX design samples — how do I separate the good from the bad?

Half the work agencies put in their portfolios are concept designs that never even went live. They showcase and sell imaginary projects that the client rejected or that the tech stack couldn't handle in the real world. Tell them straight up: "Don't show me mockups; give me the live URL so I can test the checkout flow on my phone myself."

Test the agency's sample against these three criteria during the meeting: 1) Search and filtering: with dozens of complex technical specs on the page, can you narrow down the filter in two clicks? 2) Information density: can a technician see the part's diameter and compatible models on a single screen, or do they get exhausted scrolling? 3) Form friction: how many unnecessary fields are they forced to fill out during checkout?

we approved an interface last year purely because it looked so slick and i mean the checkout flow was stripped down so much that nobody could figure out where to pick shipping or invoice types. our call center was jammed for a month, so we had to roll back to something closer to the old layout.

On our own B2B site, we hid product variant selection behind a dropdown menu just to make it look modern. Our order completion rate tanked significantly in the first month. Once we switched back to old-school, side-by-side radio buttons, the quote form submission rates returned to normal. Sleek design doesn't always translate to sales.

Did the agencies send you static screenshots or did they present a clickable prototype? Also, have you spoken to at least three actual buyers in your industry to hear where they get stuck most on your current site?

Open up the sample design they sent and hand your phone to one of your senior service techs. Tell them "Try adding a 220V heating element to the cart and placing an order." If they can't finish the task in three minutes, that design is a failure for your business, no matter how gorgeous it looks.

Before signing any service agreement, I strongly advise including information architecture diagrams, user journey maps, and pre-launch usability tests in the agency's scope of work alongside final interface assets, making them formal delivery requirements.

We made a similar mistake two years ago. We fell in love with the micro-animations in an agency's portfolio and rushed into a contract. Once the project was delivered, we realized the system couldn't paginate the thousands of technical data rows pulled from our ERP integration. The designer had built the layout using three lines of dummy data; once the live database was plugged in, the UI completely fell apart.

My questions are cleared up, thanks. Payment schedules should be tied to project phases, not calendar dates.

If I were you, I'd go this route.

I agree.

I was thinking the same thing. The system lives on after delivery; maintenance is a separate line item.

If you have questions, write them; I'll answer as best I can.

I'm writing this so you don't make the same mistake. Any unwritten clause becomes a point of disagreement later, as both sides remember it differently.

Proven by experience.

Three different views emerged, they all complement each other. If scope grows, either time or budget must grow. There is no third option.

Everything goes well for the first three months; problems arise in the fourth. Of course, it varies if your situation is different.

Let me share my experience. People defend habits, not processes. Resistance comes from there.

Hope this helps.

There's a trap here, let me mention it. Don't hesitate to ask; those who don't ask always pay more.

Good luck with that.

I'll try it. Everyone rushing into ux design samples gets stuck at the same point.

Most time waste accumulates in tasks waiting for approval.

I'm curious too. The cheapest quote is usually the least thought-out one.

If you don't write this down from the start, it leads to arguments later. Of course, it varies if your situation is different.

I didn't know that.