The AI-native engineer you need, working inside your team.
Vetted AI-native engineers who join your team, your process and your standup, with our bench and review culture behind them.
Two more strong engineers, on the team you already run.
Sometimes you don’t need a team or a project — you need two more strong engineers on the team you already run. Augmentation is exactly that: individual engineers, matched to your stack and your domain, working under your direction, in your process, with our bench and review culture behind them. There is no parallel plan, no shadow project manager and no separate definition of done. The person joins your standup, picks up your tickets and is measured by your team’s standard.
It is the fastest way to add capability without changing how you work. A backend engineer who has run Kafka consumers in production, a DevOps engineer who has migrated a live estate to Kubernetes, a mobile engineer who has shipped through App Review dozens of times — the specific experience you need for the next two quarters, without a hiring cycle that takes longer than the work. If the engagement grows into ownership of a roadmap rather than a gap in a team, it converts into a dedicated team without changing the people.
The vetting is the product. Every engineer we place has passed our technical review and works agentically: AI takes the repetitive work, the engineer owns the design and the correctness. You interview them yourself before that, and you say no as often as you need to.
Four things that make augmentation work.
Adding a person to a working team is easy to do badly. What makes it work is who is on the bench, how honestly they are matched, how completely they join your process, and what stands behind them when the work gets hard.
AI-native bench
Backend, front-end, mobile, DevOps, data and ML — every profile carries real production history you can probe in the interview. We do not send potential; we send people who have run the thing you are about to build, in production, with the incidents that taught them why the simple answer is usually right. Profiles name the systems, the scale and the responsibilities rather than listing technologies.
Fast, honest matching
Profiles come once we have people who match your stack and your domain. If we do not have the right person, we say so rather than sending the closest CV and hoping the interview goes well. That answer sometimes comes with a suggestion — a different seniority, a different discipline, or a shape of engagement that would actually solve the problem you described.
Your process, genuinely
Our engineers join your rituals, boards, repositories and review standards without friction. No shadow management, no parallel reporting line, no weekly call where we tell you what our person did. Your lead directs the work; our account lead exists for the commercial and pastoral side, and stays out of delivery unless something needs escalating.
Backed individuals
Behind each engineer sits our review culture, a specialist bench they can ask, and a no-fee replacement if the fit is wrong during the trial. An augmented engineer stuck on an unfamiliar area can pull in someone who has solved it before — a Kubernetes question, a PostgreSQL performance problem — at no extra cost to you.
How the model works, day to day.
The filter that happens before you meet anyone.
By the time a profile reaches you, the person has been through a screen for real production history, a technical interview run by an engineer who does the same work, a practical exercise reviewed against the standard we hold internally, and reference checks on how they behaved in a team rather than only on what they built. That is the whole point of the model: your interview is the last filter, not the first one, so your engineers spend an hour confirming a fit rather than a week finding out there isn’t one.
- Technical interviews run by engineers from the same discipline, not by recruiters
- A practical exercise reviewed against the standard we apply to our own work
- References on collaboration and ownership, not only on delivery
A first week that is planned, not improvised.
The first week decides the engagement. We ask for three things before day one: environment access ready, an onboarding buddy named on your side, and a first ticket chosen — something small, real and in the main path of the codebase. Our engineer starts by reading the estate with your buddy, takes the first ticket through your review process early, and moves to a normal ticket load once access and context are in place. Nothing about that is heroic; it works because the preparation is agreed in advance and because the person joining has done first weeks in unfamiliar codebases many times before.
- Access, buddy and first ticket agreed before the start date
- A first change through your review process early on
- A normal ticket load once access and context are in place
What happens when the fit is wrong.
Occasionally a match does not work — the domain turned out to need different experience, the role changed shape after the brief, or the chemistry with the team is not there. That should be a short conversation, not a long problem. Say it once to the account lead and the rules below apply. There is no case to build, no commercial penalty for raising it early, and no expectation that you manage a performance conversation with somebody else’s employee. Replacements come with paired handover so the context your team already invested is not lost with the person.
- One conversation is enough to start a replacement — no formal process
- No-fee handover
- A regular three-way check-in so problems surface before they are expensive
One person, with a company behind them.
The weakness of hiring a contractor directly is that they are alone. An augmented Odeontech engineer is not: they bring the internal review culture with them and can reach specialists who have solved the problem in front of them. That matters most at the awkward moments — a production incident in an unfamiliar area, a security review with a deadline, a database that has started behaving differently under load. It is also why our engineers tend to raise the standard around them rather than only absorbing yours: the practices they arrive with are the ones we run on our own platforms.
- Access to specialists across cloud, data, security and mobile disciplines
- The same engineering standards we apply on our own products
- An account lead who handles the commercial side so your lead handles the work
Four reasons teams call us.
A seat is empty and the roadmap is not.
A resignation, a parental leave, or a hire that is three months from starting. The work does not pause, so one of our engineers joins the existing team and takes the load under your lead’s direction. When your permanent hire arrives, the handover is documented and paired rather than abrupt.
- A start that depends mainly on notice periods and access, not on matching
- No change to your process, rituals or tooling
- Clean, documented exit when the permanent hire lands
Experience you would rather not learn on this project.
An event backbone, a Kubernetes migration, a payments integration, a data platform. Bringing in someone who has done it before turns an unfamiliar risk into ordinary work — and your engineers learn it from someone doing it beside them rather than from a conference talk.
- Profiles matched on the specific system, not on the keyword
- Knowledge transfer to your team as an explicit expectation
- Specialist bench behind the individual for the hard parts
Two or three seats, one working team.
When several engineers join at once, we stagger the starts by a week so your buddy capacity is not overwhelmed, and we make one of them the point of contact for the group. It stays your team and your process — the only difference is that onboarding is planned rather than repeated three times in parallel.
- Staggered starts so onboarding does not swamp your leads
- One point of contact for the group, still directed by you
- Composition adjustable as the work changes
Keep moving while recruitment runs.
Hiring senior engineers takes months, and the roadmap does not wait. Augmentation covers the interval and leaves the codebase in a better documented state for whoever arrives. Either ending is planned for: a paired handover to the permanent hire, or a conversion of the engagement if ownership has grown instead.
- Documentation and decision records left behind deliberately
- Overlap with the permanent hire where the dates allow
- Conversion to a dedicated team if ownership grows instead
What is included, and what stays yours.
Brief to handover.
Match
Role brief → curated profiles → your interviews. The brief takes about half an hour: the stack, the codebase’s age and shape, what the person will own, who they report to and what would make the first month a success. Profiles come with production history you can question, and if the right person is not on the bench we tell you that instead of filling the slot.
Embed
Access, an onboarding buddy from your team, first tickets shipped. We ask for the access and the buddy to be ready before the start date, because the first week is where an engagement is won or lost. A first change goes through your review process early on — small on purpose, real rather than a sandbox exercise.
Check
A lightweight three-way review at a rhythm agreed with you: performing, happy, still the right shape? A short conversation with your lead, the engineer and our account lead. It exists so that small mismatches — an unclear remit, a skill the role turned out to need, a rota that is not working — are corrected when they appear rather than at a renewal conversation.
Hand over
Documented handover and overlap when the need ends — or conversion to a dedicated team if it grew. Handover is part of the engagement rather than a favour at the end: written notes on the areas owned, decisions recorded, and an overlap period with whoever picks the work up. Access is revoked on the agreed date and the account lead confirms it in writing.
What the engagement includes.
- Vetted profiles that match your brief
- Engineers embedded in your process and tools
- Regular check-ins with a named account lead
- No-fee replacement and handover if the fit is wrong
- Clean handover at engagement end
- Access to the specialist bench behind each engineer, at no extra cost
- NDAs and device and access policy compliance
When augmentation is the right shape.
Choose augmentation when you already run a working team with a lead, a backlog and a definition of done, and the constraint is capacity or one specific kind of experience. It is the fastest model to start, the easiest to stop, and the least disruptive to how your engineers work. It suits covering a departure or a leave, adding experience for an unfamiliar piece of architecture, scaling a squad by two or three seats for a couple of quarters, or bridging the months between a headcount approval and a hire.
Look elsewhere when there is no team to join. An engineer with no lead, no backlog owner and no review partner will be productive in the wrong direction, and that is a failure of the model rather than of the person. If the work is a roadmap that needs owning, design and QA alongside engineering, and someone accountable for delivery, a dedicated team is the honest answer. If the outcome is fixed and finite — an MVP, a migration with a date — a scoped project prices the risk better. We will say which of the three we think you need, including when it is not the one you asked about; outsourcing vs outstaffing sets out the trade-offs in full.
Frequently asked questions
Send us the role brief.
Stack, codebase, what the person would own, and when you need them. You get matching profiles — or an honest no.