When does it make sense to use an auto-conversion tool instead of manual implementation?
Auto-conversion tools are useful for rapid prototyping or generating a rough structural scaffold that an engineer then rewrites. They are rarely appropriate for production code because they cannot reason about reuse, responsive behaviour, or interactive states.
Manual implementation is the right choice whenever the output will be maintained, extended, or used across more than one context — which describes almost every production codebase.
How long does a typical Figma-to-React engagement take?
Duration depends on the size of the design system and the complexity of the components involved. A focused engagement covering a core set of UI primitives typically runs four to eight weeks. A full design system implementation with documentation and QA takes longer, and we scope that precisely after the initial audit.
We sequence delivery so your team receives working, tested components incrementally rather than waiting for a single large release.
How do you handle design system governance once the components are built?
We set up a token pipeline and Storybook documentation that makes the design system self-governing for routine changes. Colour, spacing, and typography updates flow from Figma variables through the token pipeline to CSS custom properties without requiring a code change per component.
For structural changes — new variants, new components, layout changes — we recommend a lightweight governance process: a named design-system owner on each side who reviews Figma changes before they reach the implementation queue.
What happens when Figma designs change after implementation?
Design changes are a normal part of any product lifecycle. Because we implement components with typed props and a token pipeline, many visual changes — colour, spacing, typography — propagate automatically through the token layer without touching component code.
Structural changes, such as new variants or layout modifications, require a code update. Our handoff documentation makes those changes straightforward for your internal team, and we remain available for ongoing support if you prefer us to manage them directly.
Do you work with existing React codebases or only greenfield projects?
We work with both. For existing codebases, the design system audit includes a review of your current component architecture so that new components integrate with your existing patterns rather than introducing a parallel system.
We pay particular attention to CSS architecture conflicts, naming collisions, and bundle impact — the practical friction points that arise when adding a new component library to a mature codebase.
How do you ensure accessibility in the components you build?
Accessibility is addressed at the component level during build, not audited retrospectively. We write semantic HTML, apply ARIA roles and attributes where native semantics are insufficient, test keyboard navigation for every interactive component, and verify colour contrast against WCAG AA as a minimum.
Components that fail accessibility criteria do not pass our QA gate, so your team inherits a library that meets compliance requirements from the first release.