Boston Digital Review: A Mixed Bag of Highs and Lows

Introduction: High Hopes, Rocky Road

When my team set out to overhaul our outdated website and revamp our digital marketing strategy, Boston Digital seemed like the perfect fit. Their promise of "digital trailblazers" and "world-class websites" was exactly what we needed to elevate our online presence. And while the end result did deliver some impressive wins—like a 47% increase in average session duration—the journey to get there was far from smooth.

Here’s a candid breakdown of our experience, from the wins to the frustrations.

The Good: Where Boston Digital Shined

1. Strong Design Revisions & Final Output

Our initial designs missed the mark, but Boston Digital didn’t double down on a flawed direction. Instead, they listened to feedback and reworked the aesthetic until we landed on something we truly loved. The final website was sleek, functional, and—most importantly—aligned with our brand vision.

2. Improved Usability & Engagement Metrics

Post-launch, the numbers spoke for themselves:

• Average session duration jumped to 2:39 (a 47% increase).
• Report downloads remained steady at ~1,000/month, showing sustained user interest.
  We also received positive qualitative feedback from both internal teams and external users, confirming that the site was much more intuitive than before.

3. Project Managers Who Owned Their Mistakes

Despite multiple PM changes, the team was professional, polite, and proactive in addressing issues. When delays happened (and they did), they didn’t deflect—they admitted faults and worked to make things right, including compensating us for lost time by handling data migration.

The Not-So-Good: Pain Points & Process Gaps

1. Delays & Understaffing

The biggest frustration? Timeline mismanagement. Promised deadlines slipped, and we had to launch later than planned—partly due to insufficient developer bandwidth and PM turnover. At one point, an entry-level staffer was handling critical tasks, making it clear we weren’t a priority.

2. Lack of Collaboration

We expected a partnership, but too often, work happened in a silo. Designs or decisions were presented as fait accompli rather than works in progress. Earlier collaboration could’ve saved time and avoided rework.

3. A Shocking Moment of Unprofessionalism

One low point? A principal made a personal insult during a call, forcing my boss to intervene. While the PMs were great, this incident left a sour taste and raised questions about leadership culture.

Pros & Cons at a Glance

Pros:

✅ Strong final design—willing to iterate until we were happy.
✅ Tangible improvements in engagement metrics.
✅ PMs were accountable and solution-oriented.

Cons:

❌ Frequent delays and under-resourcing.
❌ Not as collaborative as expected—more "tell" than "co-create."
❌ One serious lapse in professionalism from leadership.

Final Verdict: Results Delivered, But at What Cost?

Boston Digital can produce excellent work—our website’s performance proves that. But the process was emotionally exhausting, marred by delays, staffing issues, and a glaring leadership misstep.

Would I work with them again? Only if they overhaul their project management approach. For teams who value smooth collaboration and reliability, this might not be the right fit. But if you’re laser-focused on the end product and can endure a rocky road, the destination might justify the journey.