At most agencies you talk to someone who does not build it. That is not ill will, it is how the place is organised: the developers need to keep working, so somebody sits in between to catch the questions.
On paper that is efficient. In practice it costs you two things.
What disappears in translation
You ask whether an order can have two delivery dates. The project manager writes down: "order with multiple delivery dates". The developer reads that, builds an order that can hold multiple delivery dates, and it is wrong. Because what you meant was that one line on the order ships earlier, not the whole order.
You only hear that difference when the person building it asks the question themselves. Five minutes on the phone with a developer saves two weeks in cases like this.
What disappears in time
The second bill is waiting time. You ask a question, it goes inside, passes someone who knows, and comes back three days later. Meanwhile your decision is on hold.
Here you call the developer who built it. They know not only how it works, but why that solution was chosen at the time. That last part is usually the answer you were after.
What it costs us
This is not a free choice, and we do not pretend otherwise. It means our developers get interrupted, and interruption is expensive for a developer. It also means we cannot grow indefinitely: with a hundred people this stops working, which is why we do not want to become a hundred people.
What we get back is that nobody ever has to work out what the client meant. That saves more time than it costs.
What you do get
Anna runs the planning and the agreements, so you never have to chase us about when something happens. But the question about the work itself lands with the builder, even when they are busy with something else at that moment.
That is the whole deal: you call, we pick up, and you have someone on the line who knows the answer rather than someone who is going to go and ask.
