The work
destinazio is a seven person agency in Switzerland and the country's exclusive multilingual Webflow Enterprise partner. Their clients range from global corporations to startups and SMEs, and the common thread is expansion into multilingual markets.
That mix produces two kinds of review at once. There are websites, often the same site across several languages. And there are documents, which is the part most review tools treat as an afterthought and which destinazio deals with constantly.
The problem
They started where most agencies start: internal tools plus a lot of back and forth over email. As project volume grew that stopped scaling, so they moved to MarkUp, which was already a significant improvement.
But the underlying problem was never only about having a dedicated tool. It was about how much effort the review process itself was absorbing.
Even with dedicated feedback tools, we sometimes spent too much time managing the review process itself.
The problem
That is the distinction worth sitting with. Email loses comments and strips context. A dedicated tool fixes that and then introduces its own overhead, in setup, in invitations, in explaining to a client how to use it. For an agency running several projects at once, admin created by the fix is still admin.
What changed
Pricing caught their attention first. What actually convinced them was how simple it felt in use, for the team and the clients alike. Setup was effectively immediate, with almost no learning curve on either side.
The moment it was obvious
It was not a website. It was a PDF.
The old way of reviewing a long document is an email containing a list: page 12, second paragraph, change this. Then page 19, the third bullet. Then somewhere near the middle of page 4. Every item requires the writer to describe a location and the reader to find it, and both of them to be right.
Now the client clicks the exact place and leaves the comment there. As Chris puts it, it sounds like a small thing. On a large document going through multiple revision rounds it is not a small thing at all: the describing and the finding disappear from every single item, and there are hundreds of items.
The result
Around 2 to 3 hours a week saved across the team, which he is careful to present as an estimate rather than a measurement.
He is also clear that the hours are not the main point. Feedback is clearer and centralised, which means less back and forth and faster sign-offs, and collaboration with clients is simply smoother. On website projects in particular they move through review rounds far more efficiently than before.
There is a quieter signal in how he describes the decision. This is an agency that has tried a lot of feedback tools over the years and switched more than once. Stopping is its own kind of result.
BugSmash makes feedback simple. Our clients understand it immediately, our team works faster, and everything stays in one place. We've tried a lot of feedback tools over the years, and this is the one we stuck with.
Chris BachmannManaging Partner, destinazio. Web AgencyWho he would tell
His answer is broad and emphatic: any bigger marketing team, any agency, IT people, creatives. The breadth follows from what he actually uses it for. Once the tool handles websites and documents equally well, the question stops being which department you are in and becomes whether anyone has to give you feedback on anything.
Case study prepared with Chris Bachmann of destinazio. Web Agency. Published with his permission.
