How We Rank Design Studios

Complete methodology, scoring criteria, and editorial standards for design studio rankings.

Ranking Philosophy

Our design studio rankings exist to help businesses and organizations find the right creative partner for their specific needs. We evaluate studios across multiple dimensions because "best" depends on context—a studio that excels at brand identity for Fortune 500 companies may not be the right fit for a startup's product design needs.

Our approach balances:

• Objective criteria (portfolio analysis, awards, team credentials)
• Verified outcomes (client results, project success, business impact)
• Process quality (communication, collaboration, transparency)
• Consistency (sustained excellence vs. one-hit wonders)

Scoring Criteria & Weights

Each studio receives a score from 0-10 across six categories. These scores combine into an overall rating using the weights below:

Evaluation Process

Step 1: Studio Identification & Eligibility

For each city, we compile a comprehensive list of studios through:

• Design award winner databases (past 5 years)
• Design publication coverage and "best of" lists (critically reviewed)
• Conference speaker rosters
• Referrals from industry sources
• Studios suggested by readers (via contact form)

Eligibility requirements:

• At least 2 years of operation under current name/ownership
• Minimum 5 verifiable projects with public portfolio
• Active operation (studios must be currently accepting projects)
• Primary physical presence in the city (not just a mailing address)

Step 2: Independent Evaluation

Three editors independently score each studio across all six criteria. Editors do not confer during initial scoring to maintain independence. For portfolio evaluation, studio names are hidden to reduce bias.

Step 3: Scoring Calibration

After independent scoring, editors meet to:

• Identify and discuss score outliers (>2 point differences)
• Review evidence and adjust scores where new information emerges
• Ensure consistent interpretation of scoring rubrics
• Document reasoning for close rankings

Final scores are the average of three editors' calibrated scores.

Step 4: Verification & Fact-Checking

Before publication:

• All factual claims (founding dates, locations, project credits) are verified against primary sources
• Project outcomes are validated against public records when possible
• Studios are given opportunity to correct factual errors (but not dispute scores)
• Pricing estimates are cross-referenced with industry sources and project value data

Step 5: Publication & Transparency

Published rankings include:

• Overall score and individual category scores for top-ranked studios
• Last updated date
• Number of studios evaluated
• Link to this methodology
• Disclosure of any conflicts of interest (even perceived ones)

Data Sources

Source Type	Examples	Reliability Weight
Primary Sources	Studio portfolios, case studies, published interviews	High - directly verifiable
Award Databases	D&AD, ADC, Webby, Red Dot, Fast Company	High - objective records
Design Publications	Design Observer, It's Nice That, Eye on Design	High - editorial standards
Client Testimonials	Studio websites, case studies	Medium - self-selected but useful
Review Platforms	Clutch, GoodFirms	Low - verification challenges
Community Discussion	Designer forums, social media	Low - requires careful vetting

What Does NOT Influence Rankings

Update Cadence

Design studio rankings are living documents:

• Quarterly reviews: Every 3 months, we review rankings for each city, updating scores based on new projects, awards, or market changes.
• Immediate updates: Studio closures, major leadership changes, or significant quality shifts trigger out-of-cycle updates within 30 days of verification.
• Annual deep dives: Once per year, we re-evaluate methodology and expand the number of studios reviewed per city.
• Changelog tracking: All ranking changes are documented in our public changelog with dates and reasoning.

Adding New Studios

We continuously monitor for emerging studios. If you believe a studio should be evaluated:

1. Submit a suggestion with studio name, location, and why it should be considered
2. We'll review against eligibility criteria within 10 business days
3. If eligible, the studio enters the next quarterly review cycle
4. Studios are evaluated using the same process as all existing listings

Important: Suggesting a studio does not guarantee inclusion. Studios must meet eligibility requirements and score competitively within their market.

Corrections & Disputes

Factual Errors

If you identify incorrect information (wrong address, outdated pricing, project misattribution), submit a correction with supporting evidence. We investigate all corrections within 5 business days and publish updates with acknowledgment.

Score Disputes

Studios cannot dispute subjective rankings (e.g., "we think we should be #1 instead of #3"). However, if a studio believes their score was based on factual errors or evaluation mistakes, they can:

1. Contact us via official form with specific concerns
2. Provide evidence of evaluation errors (not just disagreement)
3. We'll review with fresh editors and respond within 15 business days

If a re-evaluation finds errors, we update scores and publish a correction notice. If our original evaluation stands, we explain the reasoning.

Editorial Independence

Rankin's rankings are editorial decisions made by our team. We maintain independence through:

• No advertising relationships with ranked studios
• No affiliate revenue from studio referrals
• No shared ownership with studios or holding companies
• Editors do not accept free services, gifts, or hospitality from studios
• Full disclosure if any conflict of interest emerges

Our business model is planned to include future advertising, but advertisers will never receive preferential ranking treatment. All ads will be clearly labeled.

Limitations & Acknowledgments

Our methodology has inherent limitations:

• Portfolio analysis is subjective - While we use multiple editors and rubrics, design evaluation involves taste and judgment.
• Public information only - We can't access confidential client data, so outcomes are based on publicly available information.
• Delayed recognition - Newly launched studios need time to build portfolio and recognition before competitive scoring.
• Geographic coverage - We currently cover major U.S. cities; international expansion is planned but incomplete.
• Category breadth - Design studios span huge range of specializations; rankings may not capture every niche perfectly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do studios know they're being ranked?

We do not notify studios before initial ranking publication. After publication, studios may request factual corrections. This approach prevents pre-publication pressure or preferential access.

Can studios opt out of rankings?

No. Rankings are editorial content based on publicly available information, similar to journalism. Studios cannot opt out, but they can request correction of factual errors.

Why don't you share individual category scores for all studios?

We publish overall scores for all ranked studios and detailed breakdowns for top 10. Publishing full breakdowns for 50+ studios per city creates information overload without added value for most readers.

How do you handle studios with multiple offices?

Multi-office studios are evaluated per location. If a studio has offices in New York and Los Angeles, each office is ranked separately within its city, based on that office's specific work, team, and capabilities.

Do you rank freelancers or solo practitioners?

Currently no. Our rankings focus on studios (defined as 2+ full-time designers). We may add freelancer rankings in the future with different methodology.

Methodology Evolution

We continuously refine our approach based on feedback, industry changes, and our own learning. Material methodology changes are published with 30 days notice and explained in our changelog. Past methodologies remain archived for transparency.

Current version: 1.0 (Launched December 2025)

Read our complete editorial policy