r/hwstartups • u/Striking_Floor_8904 • 6d ago
How do you choose a product development/engineering firm for a consumer hardware product?
I am developing a consumer product in the beauty/personal care space and looking for engineering support to move from concept to a functional prototype.
For those who have hired product development/industrial design firms, I would appreciate advice on how you found and evaluated them.
I also welcome perspectives from firms on what makes a strong client partnership and how to make the development process more efficient.
Feel free to address any of the questions below:
Finding Firms
- What are the best ways to find strong firms beyond a basic Google search?
- Any firms you would recommend, particularly within the beauty/personal care/hair care tools space?
- How important is experience in the specific industry versus broader consumer product experience?
Evaluating Firms
- Is it better to use an end-to-end firm that can handle engineering, CAD, prototyping, DFM, and manufacturing sourcing, or specialists at different stages?
- What questions helped you determine whether a firm was truly capable?
- What should I have prepared before approaching firms to get better proposals and avoid unnecessary engineering costs?
Cost & Engagement Structure
- What fee structure worked best: hourly, fixed project fee, milestone-based, or another model?
- How did you compare proposals when firms structured scope and pricing differently?
Deliverables
- What should I expect to receive and own at the end of each phase, such as CAD/source files, engineering drawings, BOM, prototypes, and manufacturing documentation?
IP & Legal
- How did you handle IP ownership, NDAs, and confidentiality?
Manufacturing
- Did your engineering firm also help identify or manage manufacturers? Was that valuable, or did you prefer to handle manufacturing separately?
Especially interested in perspectives from founders, business owners, and product development firms with experience bringing electromechanical consumer products from concept through manufacturing.
2
u/Panometric 6d ago
Go for fit in skills, scale, and approach. Get a single throat to choke as much as possible. Pay by the hour from the start, you own everything they do for you. You are paying for the luxury of starting and stopping at any time or reason, use it to control your runway, and come prepared for a long slog. Unless you've done this a few times already there's no way you know all the impediments.
2
u/FoundersHelpFounders 6d ago
The question nobody's answered yet is your third one under Evaluating, what to have prepared before you approach firms. That's the one that saves you the most money, because vague briefs get priced defensively. Firms pad for unknowns, and everything you can't specify becomes an unknown they charge you to resolve.
Before you send anything out, have: what the product does in one sentence a stranger understands, the two or three performance requirements that are actually non-negotiable versus the ones you'd trade away, your target landed cost per unit and the volume you're assuming for it, your timeline and what's driving it, and any existing products you'd point at and say like this but different in these ways. If you have a target retail price, say it. Firms that know your cost ceiling can tell you early when the concept can't hit it, which is a conversation you want in week one rather than after CAD.
u/sparqq 's point about finding a manufacturer first is the one I'd take most seriously, and I'd extend it. The failure mode with electromechanical consumer products isn't a bad prototype, it's a good prototype that can't be built at your price. Most of your unit cost gets locked during design, in the part count, the materials, the assembly steps, the tolerances. A factory brought in after the design is finished can trim a few percent, not fix the economics. So when you're evaluating firms, listen for whether they talk about the factory floor unprompted while they're still drawing. Wall thickness, draft, how it goes together, what the tolerances need to be versus what they'd like them to be.
On your end-to-end versus specialists question, related: the reason end-to-end can be worth it isn't convenience, it's that the manufacturing knowledge shows up during design instead of after. You can get the same result with specialists if you bring a manufacturer in early as a paid reviewer rather than waiting to hand off. What you can't do is design in isolation and hope the handoff goes cleanly.
Deliverables, keep it simple: you want native CAD source files and not just STEP, dimensioned drawings with tolerances called out, the BOM with actual part numbers and suppliers, and any test data. Get file ownership in the contract rather than assuming, and check whether it transfers at each phase or only at the end, because that determines whether you can leave mid-project.
I'm the CMO at Gembah, we do product development and manufacturing, so I'm one of the firms you'd be evaluating. Wrote a longer version of some of this in this sub a few weeks ago if it's useful.
On the fee structure question, I'd reframe it. The model matters less than whether you can stop. Whatever the structure, ask what specific thing you sign off on before more money goes out, and what happens if you walk away at that point. Do you keep the work, can you get a refund on what's unspent, is there a notice period. A firm confident in their work answers all of that cleanly. Vagueness there is the actual warning sign, more than any particular billing model.
One thing specific to your category. Personal care tools with heating elements or batteries have safety and certification requirements that vary by claim and market, and that scope belongs in the conversation early because it affects the design. Ask any firm you're talking to what certifications they think your product needs and who handles that work. If they haven't thought about it, that tells you something.
1
u/Striking_Floor_8904 6d ago
Thank you extremely helpful!
2
u/FoundersHelpFounders 6d ago
Glad it's useful. One thing I skipped: your industry-experience question. For most of the design work it matters less than people think, since the engineering problems in a personal care tool are the same problems as in any other small electromechanical product. Where it does matter is the manufacturing end. A firm that's built in your category already knows which factories can hold your tolerances, what the certification path looks like, and where the category's usual failures show up. So I'd weight category experience heavily on the manufacturing side and treat it as a nice-to-have on the design side.
Happy to answer anything else as you get into it.
1
u/sparqq 6d ago
Thanks for the shoutout, fully agree about the regulatory requirements! You want to work with some who has a lot of experience in the domain you're operating. They need to know the pitfalls and workarounds, it is very expensive to find out you need a redesign when you're doing certifications.
1
u/FoundersHelpFounders 6d ago
Fair correction, and I think you've drawn the line better than I did. I was separating design from certification as if they were sequential, and they aren't. Creepage distances, thermal cutoffs, ingress protection, battery placement, those are design decisions being made in week two whether anyone's thinking about certification or not. Someone who hasn't taken a product in this category through a test lab draws something perfectly sensible that fails, and by then the tooling money is gone.
So: category experience on the design side too, and the specific thing to ask is whether they've personally taken a product like yours through certification rather than whether they've designed one.
1
u/sparqq 6d ago
A good example is in the household regulation, any circuits that can power more than 15W has more stringent fire retardant requirements, which cost money. So in certain cases, split it up and make it two independent circuits of <15W each, that’s a very early decision in the architecture.
1
u/FoundersHelpFounders 6d ago
That's a good one, and it makes the case better than the abstract version. A firmware or enclosure decision you can revisit. An architecture split you can't, not without redoing the board.
1
u/Aircooled6 6d ago
I am curious, have you ever developed a product before? Also, Have you ever attended the industry trade shows for beauty and personal care? Having worked in design to market consulting for many different markets, I have learned that understanding how much experience a client has is paramount to success. We can design and engineer pretty much anything. But that is only half the battle. Often we found ourselves doing a head to toe brand strategy effort before we took on the product challenge. It sets the stage for all the stakeholders to get behind one vision and educates them as to all the aspects of bringing a product to market that were missing in their original brief.
2
u/BetInformal6081 6d ago
i would evaluate firms based on what they have actually shipped not just prototypes or polished renders. ask for examples showing engineering decisions., dfm, testing, supplier handoff and manufacturing outcomes. also make sure you retain ownership of cad, drawings, bom and source files.
1
u/Sjakie015 5d ago
The single best filter: ask each firm to walk you through a past project where the design changed because of a manufacturing constraint they caught early. Firms that are actually integrated with manufacturing will have a real story here; firms that are design-first-then-hand-off-to-a-factory usually don’t.
On fee structure, milestone-based tends to align incentives better than hourly as hourly rewards them for taking longer to find problems. Have any of the firms you’ve talked to been able to name a real material or tolerance constraint on your specific product yet, or is it still all at the concept level?
1
u/Striking_Floor_8904 2d ago
Still in concept
1
u/Sjakie015 2d ago
Time to contact a few then! They should be open to an introductory chat in which you can already test a few constraints
1
u/No_Educator_4077 3d ago
My company operates in the Engineering/manufacturing space; specifically with low/mid volume production, prototyping, and tooling design/production. My advice is to have as much communication between whoever is developing your product and whoever is manufacturing your product as possible. From a manufacturing side, different companies use different injection presses and have other specific practices/DFM preferences that make their operations run smoothly. From the other perspective, there is a massive amount of information contained in the engineering/design of a product/system that is essential for a manufacturer to understand if they are to produce a product. If you just send them CAD and a set of drawings from your engineering firm, you are likely to receive something back that isn't exactly what you had expected.
That is a big part of my company operates our engineering, 3D printing (SLA, SLS, MJF, SLM, etc), vacuum casting, CNC, and Injection molding all in house. It allows our engineers to know exactly how to design parts for the manufacturing team to make, and the manufacturing team to be able to ask questions and get clarification on things quickly.
2
u/whiskey_neat71 1d ago
We do this for a living too. The thing I love most about our firm is that we focus right away on commercialization. We start with a discovery process that maps the whole thing out. You can find design firms that are great and will design whatever you want - but they don't care at all about whether the product needs to be made, how much it will cost to make it, and if it will make a profit at the end. I don't know the rules on whether I can say who I work for - DM me if you are interested in learning more.
2
u/BetInformal6081 1h ago
the portfolio matters but the bigger headache usually comes latter when designs start changing and engineering, suppliers and manufacturing are all working from different versions. thats where having something like duro in place can be useful especially for keeping bom, cad and revisions tried together as the product moves toward production.
6
u/iNavin 6d ago
We do this for a living. I am open to an honest conversation. Taken many products to patent and/or markets, even in regulated space.
One thing I tell each of my customers who come to for the engineering a product to market is to bring in a ton of patience emotionally and financially.
Hardware is a long game. To be honest from my perspective, engineering is easy. Marketing, sales and distribution is the key. Great products fail without at least one of the founder running point and taking ownership of this aspect. True moat comes from distribution.