ChatGPT answers, unedited

• One North, A TEKsystems Company - 227 W Monroe St #3500, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• UX 4Sight - 111 W Jackson Blvd Unit 1700, Chicago, IL 60604, United States
• Grand Studio - 444 N Wells St #501, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Jerad Koskey Design - 212 N Sangamon St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• VERSIONS - 10 S LaSalle St Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Superbold Design Lab - 3151 N Lincoln Ave, Chicago, IL 60657
• Design Explored - Chicago, IL 60614
• Dialogue Theory - 1932 S Halsted St #509, Chicago, IL 60608, United States
• Futurehaus - 125 S Clark St Suite 1700, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Artversion - 205 N Michigan Ave 8th Floor, Chicago, IL 60601
• TEAMS Design - 1812 W Hubbard St #200, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States

Yes. For a Chicago product where the actual problem is inconsistent UI, a fragmented Figma library, and the need to connect design to production components, I’d be selective. A lot of Chicago agencies say “design systems” when they really mean brand guidelines.

Based on what I found, I’d shortlist these:

My Chicago shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — strongest enterprise/product option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-469-1740)

Loop — 227 W Monroe St

This would be one of my first calls if your product is fairly complex or enterprise-oriented. One North combines UX/UI, design systems and engineering, and importantly has actual experience working on United’s ORION employee-facing design system and reusable UI component library.

I'd hire them if: you need the agency to help audit the existing product, establish the system architecture, and work with engineering rather than just hand over Figma files.

Watch-out: likely more agency/enterprise-oriented than a tiny embedded product-design team.

2. UX 4Sight — good Loop option for UX + UI consistency

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-224-0095)

Loop — 111 W Jackson Blvd

UX 4Sight is particularly interesting if the problem isn't only visual inconsistency and you also need to rationalize UX patterns, information architecture, accessibility, and interaction design. Its offering spans UX/UI and UX audits.

I'd put them on the RFP if you're saying:

“Our product has accumulated five ways of doing the same thing and we need someone to figure out the right pattern before we encode it into a component library.”

3. Grand Studio — best for the product thinking around the system

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-819-2030)

Chicago — 444 N Wells St

They're technically River North rather than the Loop/West Loop, but I'd include them because their strength is complex digital products: research, product strategy, UX/UI and design systems.

I would choose Grand Studio over a pure design-system shop if you're still figuring out what the product should standardize, rather than simply needing someone to turn an existing visual language into Figma components.

4. Jerad Koskey Design — interesting West Loop independent option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-733-0561)

West Loop — 212 N Sangamon St

This is the kind of smaller, senior-led practice I'd investigate if you want one very senior design person/creative lead rather than a large agency team. The practice specifically describes work around UI systems, reusable components and cross-platform consistency.

The tradeoff is capacity: I'd want to understand how much engineering/component-library implementation they personally handle versus design direction.

5. VERSIONS — strong UI-focused option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-273-8400)

Loop — 10 S LaSalle St

VERSIONS is explicitly UI/UX-focused and emphasizes structured interface systems and design language built for scale.

I'd consider them if your primary objective is:

“Make this product feel like one coherent product again.”

I'd probe harder on their Figma → coded component → Storybook workflow before hiring them.

One wildcard I'd seriously consider

There's also a Chicago-based independent design-systems specialist, Keara Meehan, whose entire practice is centered around fixing systems that have outgrown their original Figma library. Her positioning is unusually close to the problem you're describing: token architecture, component libraries, multi-brand theming, documentation and governance, with the explicit metric being whether engineers actually use the system. Keara Design

If you're a relatively lean product team, I'd actually talk to her before a big agency.

That's because I wouldn't want you to buy a giant “design system transformation” when what you may really need is a senior person embedded with your designers and engineers for 8–16 weeks.

My ranking for your particular problem

There's also a useful distinction here: Figma component library ≠ design system. The firms I'd favor should be able to deliver the whole chain:

audit → design principles → tokens → Figma components → coded components → Storybook/docs → migration → governance.

That distinction matters because some Chicago firms advertise “design systems” but are really focused on brand/visual systems. For example, West Loop's Design B&B is much more brand/consumer-system oriented, while Multiple Inc. is similarly strongest around brand systems and cohesive digital/brand execution.

What I'd ask them in the first meeting

Don't ask “Can you build us a design system?” Ask:

1. “Show me a production design system you built where Figma components map to coded components.”
2. “How do you structure tokens?”
3. “How do you prevent Figma and React from drifting?”
4. “Who owns the component API — your designers or our engineers?”
5. “How do you decide whether two similar UI patterns should become one component?”
6. “How do you migrate an existing product without stopping feature development?”
7. “What does governance look like after you leave?”
8. “What percentage of the engagement is actual component implementation versus workshops and documentation?”

If it were my product, I'd interview One North, Keara Meehan, and Grand Studio first. That gives you three substantially different models: larger design+engineering partner, senior specialist, and product-strategy consultancy. Then I'd make them all quote the same initial 6–8 week system audit + pilot, rather than asking for a giant redesign proposal. Keara Design

I'd put them on the RFP if you're saying:

“Our product has accumulated five ways of doing the same thing and we need someone to figure out the right pattern before we encode it into a component library.”

3. Grand Studio — best for the product thinking around the system

Chicago — 444 N Wells St

They're technically River North rather than the Loop/West Loop, but I'd include them because their strength is complex digital products: research, product strategy, UX/UI and design systems.

I would choose Grand Studio over a pure design-system shop if you're still figuring out what the product should standardize, rather than simply needing someone to turn an existing visual language into Figma components.

4. Jerad Koskey Design — interesting West Loop independent option

West Loop — 212 N Sangamon St

This is the kind of smaller, senior-led practice I'd investigate if you want one very senior design person/creative lead rather than a large agency team. The practice specifically describes work around UI systems, reusable components and cross-platform consistency.

The tradeoff is capacity: I'd want to understand how much engineering/component-library implementation they personally handle versus design direction.

5. VERSIONS — strong UI-focused option

Loop — 10 S LaSalle St

VERSIONS is explicitly UI/UX-focused and emphasizes structured interface systems and design language built for scale.

I'd consider them if your primary objective is:

“Make this product feel like one coherent product again.”

I'd probe harder on their Figma → coded component → Storybook workflow before hiring them.

One wildcard I'd seriously consider

There's also a Chicago-based independent design-systems specialist, Keara Meehan, whose entire practice is centered around fixing systems that have outgrown their original Figma library. Her positioning is unusually close to the problem you're describing: token architecture, component libraries, multi-brand theming, documentation and governance, with the explicit metric being whether engineers actually use the system. Keara Design

If you're a relatively lean product team, I'd actually talk to her before a big agency.

That's because I wouldn't want you to buy a giant “design system transformation” when what you may really need is a senior person embedded with your designers and engineers for 8–16 weeks.

My ranking for your particular problem

There's also a useful distinction here: Figma component library ≠ design system. The firms I'd favor should be able to deliver the whole chain:

audit → design principles → tokens → Figma components → coded components → Storybook/docs → migration → governance.

That distinction matters because some Chicago firms advertise “design systems” but are really focused on brand/visual systems. For example, West Loop's Design B&B is much more brand/consumer-system oriented, while Multiple Inc. is similarly strongest around brand systems and cohesive digital/brand execution.

What I'd ask them in the first meeting

Don't ask “Can you build us a design system?” Ask:

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d favor firms that can bridge product design and engineering, rather than a conventional branding agency.

My Chicago shortlist

1. TXI — Loop
   • Probably my first call if this is a serious product-system effort.
   • They combine product strategy, UX/product design, and software engineering, which is important if you want the Figma system to actually map to production components.
   • Best for: design system architecture + product redesign + engineering implementation.

2. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
   • Stronger choice if you're a larger organization and need design-system work integrated with a broader digital experience/engineering environment.
   • Their capabilities explicitly include UX/UI, design systems, accessibility and digital experience work.
   • Best for: enterprise-scale consistency across products/channels.

3. Fuzzy Math — Chicago, near West Loop
   • I'd put them high on the list if the harder problem is product UX, not simply creating a Figma library.
   • They're a UX/product strategy consultancy with UI/product design and DesignOps capabilities.
   • Best for: auditing your existing product, rationalizing patterns, and establishing the UX rules behind the system.

4. Eight Bit Studios — Chicago
   • Interesting if you want the same partner to design and actually build/refactor the product.
   • They're explicitly a product studio combining UI/UX and engineering rather than just handing designs over the wall.
   • Best for: design system + implementation, particularly if your existing frontend needs work too.

5. Futurehaus — Loop
   • More of a design/technology studio than a pure design-system specialist.
   • Worth considering if your system work overlaps with broader digital experience, brand, content, and UX.

One I'd investigate specifically for the system itself

Forge Studio's design-system practice

They're unusually explicit about design-system audits → tokens → component libraries → documentation → governance → product rebuild. They say they've built 16 design systems and 40+ Figma libraries, and their process includes aligning components with code and training the client's team. forge.is

That's very close to the actual problem you're describing.

What I'd do

I'd invite TXI, Fuzzy Math, Eight Bit, and Forge to the first round, with One North as the enterprise-oriented alternative.

And I would not issue an RFP that simply says "build us a design system." Ask each firm to propose against this:

Audit our existing product → identify/reduce UI duplication → establish design tokens → build Figma component library → map components to production code → document usage/accessibility → migrate representative product surfaces → establish governance.

The key test is whether they can demonstrate Figma ↔ code parity. A beautiful Figma library that engineers don't actually use will make the consistency problem worse, not better. Several current specialist offerings explicitly include Storybook, coded components, tokens, documentation and governance rather than treating the deliverable as a Figma-only exercise. uxdesign.agency

If you tell me roughly how many designers/engineers you have, your frontend stack (React, etc.), and whether this is one product or multiple products, I can narrow this to the 3 firms I'd actually interview and what I'd ask each one.

Yes. For design systems + coded component libraries + UI consistency, I’d be fairly selective. A lot of Chicago agencies say “design systems” but are really brand/web shops; you want a partner that can bridge Figma → tokens → components → Storybook/code → governance/adoption.

My Chicago shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
My first call if you need a substantial product-system engagement. They combine UX/UI, design systems, engineering, and digital-experience work, which is important if the goal is not merely a prettier Figma library but a system engineers actually use. Their Chicago office is at 227 W Monroe.
Best for: established product, multiple teams, enterprise complexity, design + engineering alignment.

2. Fuzzy Math — Chicago
I’d seriously consider them if the problem is as much product UX consistency and design-process maturity as it is the component library itself. Their work spans product/UI design, component libraries, patterns, usability, and DesignOps/UX-org work.
Best for: auditing a messy existing product and bringing designers/product/engineering onto one system.

3. Huge Chicago — downtown
A stronger choice if this is a large strategic product transformation rather than a focused design-system build. Huge combines product strategy, UX/UI, design systems and engineering.
Best for: large product, major redesign, brand/product convergence, substantial budget.

4. Forge Studio — Chicago
This is probably the most specialized fit of the bunch. Their published process explicitly covers audit → foundations/tokens → component library → documentation → governance → product rebuild, including Figma-to-code alignment. They cite systems for organizations such as EarnIn and Roblox. forge.is
Best for: “We know exactly what we need: a serious design-system program.”

5. Connect UX Technology Solutions
Another particularly relevant specialist. They explicitly build Figma libraries alongside coded component libraries, including tokens, documentation, accessibility and design-to-development alignment. They say focused systems typically run 4–12 weeks depending on scope. uxcts.comforge.is
Best for: a relatively contained system build where you want design + engineering in the same engagement.

One important caveat

If being physically in the Loop/West Loop is a hard requirement, I'd prioritize One North and the West Loop firms, but I wouldn't make geography the deciding criterion. For this particular work, I'd rather hire a specialist who's 20 miles away than a convenient agency that primarily does branding.

For comparison, ALL FOR is genuinely in Fulton Market/West Loop and advertises design systems, UI/UX, etc., but its positioning is much more brand/visual/web oriented. allfor.agency I wouldn't put it ahead of the firms above for a software product component-library program.

How I'd rank them for your specific need

One thing I'd insist on in the RFP: don't accept “Figma component library” as the deliverable. Ask for the actual coded component API, design tokens, Storybook/documentation, accessibility rules, migration plan for existing UI, contribution/governance model, and measurable adoption targets. That's what turns a component library into a functioning design system. Forge and Connect UX explicitly describe several of those pieces. uxcts.comforge.is

If you tell me roughly (a) team size, (b) React/native/etc. stack, (c) whether you already have a Figma library, and (d) approximate budget, I can narrow this to the 3 firms I'd actually invite to pitch and tell you what I'd ask each one to propose.

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d bias toward firms that can bridge Figma → tokens → coded components → governance, rather than a conventional branding/web agency.

My Chicago shortlist

1. TXI — Loop

My first call if this is a real product-system problem. TXI is a digital product consultancy with both product design and engineering capabilities, so they’re better positioned than a pure visual-design shop to make the system actually work in production.

Best for: an existing product that has accumulated inconsistent UI and needs a serious UX/product + engineering cleanup.

2. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop

Strong option if you have a larger organization or multiple product surfaces. Their Chicago practice explicitly includes UX/UI, digital products, accessibility and design systems.

Best for: enterprise-scale governance, accessibility, multiple teams/products.

3. Jerad Koskey Design — West Loop/Fulton Market

Interesting if you want senior, hands-on design leadership rather than a big agency machine. The practice specifically covers UI systems, reusable components and cross-platform consistency.

Best for: a product team that needs a strong design-systems lead embedded with them.

4. Bluedog Design — West Loop/Fulton Market

More brand/strategy-oriented, but worth considering if your UI inconsistency is partly a brand-language problem rather than just a component-library problem.

5. UX 4Sight — Loop

A smaller Chicago UX/UI consultancy. I'd put them on the list if you want more focused UX/UI work rather than a giant transformation engagement.

One caveat: I'd look beyond geography

There are a couple of Chicago-based specialists that look unusually well matched to exactly what you're describing, even if they're not necessarily West Loop/Loop offices.

Keara Meehan is particularly compelling for a B2B SaaS/product environment. Her practice is explicitly focused on design systems for teams that have outgrown their Figma library, including token architecture, component libraries, documentation and governance. keara.design

Keara Meehan Design Systems

And Design System Labs is essentially purpose-built around this problem: Figma libraries, tokens, coded React/Vue/Web Components, Storybook, accessibility, documentation, audits and migration. designsystemlabs.co

Design System Labs

Who I'd actually interview

If this were my Chicago product, I'd probably run a first round with:

The key question I'd ask every candidate is not “Can you build us a Figma component library?”

I'd ask:

“Can you audit our existing product, define the design-token architecture, consolidate our UI patterns, build the Figma library, implement the corresponding production components, and establish the governance so our engineers actually use it six months from now?”

That separates the genuine design-system specialists from agencies that basically mean “we'll make your Figma file prettier.”

If you tell me what your Chicago product is, roughly how many designers/engineers you have, and whether you're React/web/mobile, I can narrow this to the 3 firms I'd actually put into an RFP, including what I think each should be asked to deliver and what a reasonable engagement should cost.

For a Chicago product team looking specifically for design systems, component libraries, design tokens, Figma-to-code workflows, and UI consistency, I would bias toward firms with product design + engineering depth, not general branding agencies.

My shortlist:

A few firms slightly outside your geography that are still relevant:

• Grand Studio — good for complex service/product ecosystems where you need research, UX strategy, and patterns to align.
• ArtVersion Creative Agency — more brand + digital experience oriented; better if your UI inconsistency is tied to broader brand inconsistency.

For your specific ask, I’d interview 3–4 firms and ask each to show:

1. A Figma library they built with:
   • tokens/variables
   • component variants
   • accessibility states
   • responsive behavior

2. A code implementation example:
   • React/Vue/Web Components
   • Storybook documentation
   • versioning/governance

3. Their rollout plan:
   • audit existing UI
   • prioritize components
   • migrate old screens
   • train product/design/engineering teams

I would probably start conversations with:

1. TXI — if this is a core product platform initiative
2. Fuzzy Math — if the main pain is UX inconsistency and design debt
3. Eight Bit Studios — if you need a team that can build the components into the app
4. CUX Studio — if you want a smaller, focused UI systems engagement

One additional thought: don’t hire someone who only delivers a Figma component file. A design system that does not connect to engineering ownership usually becomes another source of drift. The best engagements produce tokens + Figma components + coded components + documentation + governance. honcho.agency

If you share your product type (B2B SaaS, consumer app, fintech, healthcare, marketplace, internal tools, etc.) and team size, I can narrow this to the 2–3 firms I’d actually shortlist.

Yes. If the goal is specifically a durable product design system—not just a UI redesign—I’d narrow the Chicago field considerably.

My shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
   • 227 W Monroe St.
   • Strongest fit if you want design + engineering + enterprise-scale implementation.
   • Their Chicago practice explicitly includes UX/UI, design systems, and engineering. design.chicago.gov
   • I’d interview them if your product is fairly complex or has multiple teams/platforms.

2. UX 4Sight — Loop
   • 111 W Jackson Blvd.
   • More UX/product-design oriented than a traditional branding agency.
   • Good candidate if you need to audit the existing product, establish interaction patterns, and then systematize the UI.
   • I'd put them on the shortlist for a product-led engagement.

3. IDEO Chicago — West Loop
   • 626 W Jackson Blvd.
   • The premium option. Strong if the problem isn't merely "our components are inconsistent" but involves product strategy, workflows, research, and a broader redesign.
   • I wouldn't hire IDEO purely to crank out a component library; I'd consider them if the system is part of a larger product transformation.

4. Intechnic Corporation — Loop
   • 20 N Wacker Dr.
   • Interesting choice for a complex application/product, particularly if UX research, information architecture, accessibility and implementation matter.
   • I'd favor them over a pure branding shop if your Chicago product has lots of workflows and states.

5. Design B&B — West Loop
   • 833 W Jackson Blvd.
   • I'd consider them if brand consistency is a major part of the problem. They're more brand/identity-centric, so I'd want to see evidence of production-grade Figma/code component work before selecting them for a software-heavy system.

One important caveat

There are also specialist design-system firms that look very good on paper but aren't actually West Loop/Loop shops. For example, Honcho explicitly focuses on tokens, component libraries, documentation and design-to-development workflows, while Origin UX describes a similar Figma → coded-component → documentation approach. honcho.agency

For your particular project, I'd prioritize demonstrated ability to connect Figma components to production code over proximity to your office.

A good engagement should leave you with:

• Design tokens — color, typography, spacing, radius, elevation, etc.
• Figma component library with variants/states/responsive behavior
• Production component library (e.g. React)
• Storybook or equivalent documentation
• Accessibility baked into components
• Clear component naming/API conventions
• Design ↔ code synchronization
• Usage guidelines and examples
• A governance model so the system doesn't decay six months later
• Migration of your existing product UI, rather than creating a beautiful library nobody adopts

That's consistent with how mature design-system practices are being framed today: the valuable deliverable isn't merely a Figma kit; it's a system spanning tokens, components, code, documentation, and governance. honcho.agency

Who I'd call first

If this were my Chicago product, I'd probably run an RFP/pilot with:

One North + UX 4Sight + Intechnic

…and keep IDEO as the wildcard if you're contemplating a substantial product rethink.

I'd give each firm the same 2–3 representative screens from your existing product and ask them to show:

1. how they'd diagnose the inconsistency,
2. how they'd turn those screens into a system,
3. what they'd put in Figma,
4. what they'd put in code,
5. how they'd handle legacy UI,
6. and what they'd do to keep designers and engineers from drifting apart.

That exercise will tell you much more than agency portfolios.

If you tell me what your Chicago product is, roughly how many product designers/engineers you have, and whether you're React/web, native mobile, or both, I can narrow this to the 3 firms I'd actually interview and what I'd expect each to cost.

Yes. For design systems + production component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d bias toward firms with real design-engineering capability—not traditional branding agencies.

I looked specifically around the Loop/West Loop and checked their current design-system/product work. My shortlist would be:

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — my first call

One North, A TEKsystems Company
Web
Address: 227 W Monroe St #3500, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
Phone: +1 312-469-1740
Loop — 227 W Monroe St

This is the strongest fit I found. One North explicitly does digital products, UX/UI, design systems, and implementation, and its current Chicago practice is actively hiring for a Principal Design Engineer focused on AI, design systems, Figma, tokens, React/Vue, Storybook, etc. www.onenorth.com

More importantly, they have a very relevant case study with United Airlines' ORION design system: they worked on the design-system documentation, Figma migration, and a reusable software component library, including 85 commits and 24 pull requests. www.onenorth.com

They are also a Figma Signature Service Partner, with specific capabilities around design-system architecture, governance, migration, coded components, documentation, and design-to-development workflows. content.onenorth.com

I'd hire them if: your Chicago product is substantial, has multiple designers/engineers, and you want the system to become actual infrastructure rather than a nice Figma library.

2. CUX Studio — good product-design option

CUX Studio
Web
Address: 122 S Michigan Ave suit 1390, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
Phone: +1 773-644-5238
Loop — 122 S Michigan Ave

CUX is more product/UI-oriented than a conventional branding shop. Its offering includes product design, UX/UI, design systems and UI toolkits, with an emphasis on validating ideas and keeping the experience consistent.

I'd put them on the shortlist if you want a somewhat smaller, more hands-on product-design engagement rather than a large digital-experience consultancy.

I'd hire them if: the immediate problem is inconsistent UI/UX across your product and you want a partner close to the product-design team.

3. UnitOneNine — interesting West Loop boutique

UnitOneNine
Web
Address: 650 W Lake St, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
Phone: +1 312-970-0019
West Loop — 650 W Lake St

UnitOneNine combines UX/UI, digital product work, and design systems/toolkits.

I'd consider them particularly if your problem spans brand + product UI—e.g. the product feels inconsistent not just because components are duplicated, but because the underlying visual language isn't well defined.

I'd hire them if: you want a boutique team and need to connect brand, UX and reusable UI rather than treating the design system as purely an engineering project.

4. ArtVersion® Creative Agency — stronger for visual/brand system work

ArtVersion® Creative Agency
Web
Address: 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
Phone: +1 312-837-7466
Loop — 211 W Wacker Dr

ArtVersion has UI/UX, digital product, brand systems and in-house development capabilities.

I'd rank it below One North for a production-grade component library, but higher if your real problem is that the product's visual identity, interaction language and brand aren't coherent.

My ranking for your particular brief

One North is the clear standout because there's unusually direct evidence that they've done the exact thing you're describing: design-system architecture → Figma/design library → coded components → documentation → governance → adoption by designers and engineers. content.onenorth.comwww.onenorth.com

One thing I'd insist on in the RFP

Don't ask them to "build us a design system." Ask for:

1. UI audit — inventory existing screens/components and identify inconsistencies.
2. Foundations/tokens — color, typography, spacing, elevation, radius, motion, accessibility.
3. Figma component library — components + variants + states + responsive behavior.
4. Production component library — ideally your actual React/frontend stack, not merely Storybook mockups.
5. Design ↔ code synchronization — clear ownership and a workflow that prevents drift.
6. Patterns/templates — not just buttons and inputs; tables, forms, navigation, search, empty states, errors, dashboards, etc.
7. Governance — who approves new components and how the system evolves.
8. Migration — actually converting your existing product, not handing you a pristine library that nobody uses.

That last point is critical. A design system only creates value when the existing product gets migrated onto it and the team adopts it.

I'd probably talk to One North and CUX first, then use UnitOneNine as the third bid if you want a more boutique/brand-oriented perspective.

If you tell me what your Chicago product is, roughly how big the product/team is, and whether you're React/web/mobile, I can narrow this to 2–3 firms and tell you which one I'd actually hire and what I’d expect them to charge.

Yes. For a Chicago product where the real need is a durable design system—not just a prettier UI kit—I’d prioritize firms that can bridge Figma, component architecture, engineering handoff, and governance.

I’d shortlist these:

1. CUX Studio — Loop
   • Probably the most directly aligned local option.
   • Their product-design work explicitly includes design systems/UI toolkits, UX/UI, prototyping, and product design.
   • Good fit if you want a relatively focused Chicago team rather than a giant consultancy.
   • My take: worth interviewing first if you want hands-on product UI work.

2. VERSIONS — Loop
   • UI/UX-focused collective with an emphasis on design language and scalable digital experiences.
   • More interesting to me than a conventional branding agency if the problem is “our product has accumulated inconsistent UI and needs a coherent system.”
   • My take: strong candidate for a UI modernization + design-system engagement.

3. Dialogue Theory — Chicago
   • Small, senior digital design/development shop.
   • Their capabilities include UX/UI, design systems, and full-stack implementation, and they specifically position themselves as an extended team for complex organizations.
   • My take: particularly attractive if you want the agency to work closely with your engineers rather than throw a Figma file over the wall.

4. ArtVersion — Loop
   • At 211 W Wacker, so literally in the Loop.
   • Stronger on the brand + digital experience side, but they also do UI/UX and development.
   • My take: I'd consider them if your inconsistent UI is partly a brand-language problem, not purely a component-library problem.

5. Futurehaus — Loop
   • Chicago design/technology studio at 125 S Clark.
   • Combines strategy, digital experience, UX/UI, development, and design systems.
   • My take: interesting if the product needs broader experience/brand thinking alongside the system.

6. Design B&B — West Loop
   • At 833 W Jackson.
   • Very strong brand/system thinking, but their center of gravity appears more brand/consumer than software-component engineering.
   • My take: I'd use them if you need to establish the visual language first, then potentially pair them with a product/design-engineering specialist.

The important distinction

For your particular brief, I'd not hire primarily based on whether an agency says “design systems” on its website.

I'd ask every finalist to show me:

• A real Figma component library they've shipped
• The corresponding coded React/component library
• How they handle design tokens
• Variants and states—not just the happy path
• Accessibility
• Storybook or equivalent documentation
• How Figma and production code stay synchronized
• Their approach to auditing an existing product rather than starting from scratch
• Governance: who gets to add/change a component?
• Migration strategy for existing screens
• How they prevent the system from becoming another abandoned Figma file

That last point matters enormously. A design system is really a product shared by design and engineering, not a collection of pretty Figma components. The better specialist firms explicitly treat tokens, components, documentation, code, governance, and adoption as one system. www.metajive.com

One wildcard I'd seriously consider

If you're willing to go beyond Chicago for the actual specialist, I'd also interview Design System Labs. They're explicitly focused on design systems, including Figma libraries, tokens, production React/Vue/Web Components, Storybook, accessibility, audits, and migration. designsystemlabs.co

For a product team, specialist expertise may be more valuable than having the agency's office physically in the West Loop.

My ranking for your use case

If you tell me roughly what your product is (B2B SaaS, consumer, fintech, healthcare, marketplace, etc.), your frontend stack, and whether you already have a messy Figma library/codebase, I can narrow this to the 3 I'd actually put in an RFP—and find relevant case studies and approximate engagement sizes.

Yes. For a Chicago product team that needs a real design system—not just a prettier Figma file—I’d shortlist firms that can bridge product design, tokens, component libraries, and engineering adoption.

My Chicago shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
   • Best for: a larger, enterprise-grade engagement.
   • They explicitly cover UX/UI, engineering, and design systems, including work around consistency and accessibility.
   • I'd consider them if you have multiple product teams or a substantial existing UI estate to rationalize.
   • Caveat: probably more agency/enterprise-oriented than you need if you're looking for a small senior product-design strike team.

2. Futurehaus — Loop
   • Best for: a smaller, senior design + technology partner.
   • They're at 125 S Clark and combine strategy, digital experience, UX/UI, development, and design systems.
   • I'd put them high on the list if you want design and implementation thinking together, rather than handing a Figma library over the wall.

3. ArtVersion® Creative Agency — Loop
   • Best for: bringing brand + product UI into a coherent visual system.
   • Their Chicago practice combines branding, UI/UX, visual systems, and in-house development.
   • Stronger candidate if your inconsistency problem is partly brand/visual language, not purely component architecture.

4. Jerad Koskey Design — West Loop
   • Best for: a more hands-on senior design-lead engagement.
   • His practice specifically covers UI systems, reusable components, design systems, and cross-functional creative/UX leadership.
   • This is the kind of option I'd investigate if you want a senior practitioner embedded with your product team, rather than a large agency machine.

5. Dialogue Theory — near West Loop
   • Best for: complex products where UX architecture and accessibility matter.
   • They combine UX/UI, design systems, and development, with a stated focus on scalable implementation.
   • Particularly interesting if your product has complicated workflows or enterprise users.

One important wrinkle

I'd actually expand the search beyond firms physically located in the Loop/West Loop. The design-systems-specific capability is more important than the office address.

For example, Fuzzy Math is not in the Loop, but I'd absolutely put them in the competitive set. Fuzzy Math They are a Chicago UX/product consultancy with explicit product design and UX-organization/DesignOps capabilities.

There are also firms whose actual offering is unusually close to what you're describing. For example, Quality AboveAll describes a system consisting of design tokens + production React/Tailwind components + Storybook + Figma, with design/code kept in lockstep. www.quality-aboveall.com GCD similarly emphasizes token architecture, Figma component libraries, design-to-code workflows, documentation, and governance. gcdtech.com

If it were my project

I'd run an RFP with 4–5 firms, probably:

Jerad Koskey → Futurehaus → Fuzzy Math → One North → one design-systems specialist

And I would not ask them simply to "build us a design system."

I'd ask for:

• audit of your existing UI/product
• component inventory + consolidation strategy
• Figma variables/tokens
• component API/variant architecture
• coded React component library
• Storybook/documentation
• accessibility baked into components
• Figma ↔ code synchronization
• migration of 1–2 real product areas
• contribution/governance model
• measurable adoption/consistency criteria

That's important because a beautiful Figma library that engineers don't actually use is not a design system. Chicago's own Design System makes the same distinction: it combines visual standards, a UI pattern library, implementation, and methods for teams to actually use the system. design.chicago.gov

My first calls would be Futurehaus, Fuzzy Math, and One North, with Jerad Koskey as the wildcard if you want a highly senior, embedded design lead.

If you tell me roughly your product type, team size, current stack (e.g. React), and whether you already have a Figma/component library, I can narrow this to the 3 firms I'd actually interview and what I'd ask each one.

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d prioritize firms that understand the design-to-engineering system, not just firms that do visual/UI design.

Based on what I found around the Loop/West Loop, my shortlist would be:

My top 4

1. TXI — Loop
   • Best if you need design + engineering alignment.
   • They’re a product consultancy rather than a pure design shop, with UX, product strategy, and software engineering under one roof.
   • I’d talk to them if the goal is a component library that actually gets adopted in production, rather than a beautiful Figma library that engineering ignores.
   • Their Chicago office is at 10 S Riverside Plaza.

2. Atomic Object — West Loop
   • Best if you want the system tied closely to actual product development.
   • Their Chicago team does end-to-end product work, including design and engineering, and the office is at 609 W Randolph.
   • I'd especially consider them if your React/frontend architecture and design system need to evolve together.

3. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
   • Best for a larger/more enterprise-oriented engagement.
   • They explicitly offer design systems and have experience with large digital ecosystems where consistency and accessibility matter.
   • Their office is at 227 W Monroe.
   • I'd favor them if your Chicago product is part of a larger corporate ecosystem rather than a standalone SaaS product.

4. UX 4Sight — Loop
   • Best if the underlying UX is part of the problem.
   • They’re at 111 W Jackson and have a strong UX/UI orientation.
   • I’d use them if you need to first rationalize flows, information architecture, and interaction patterns before codifying the component library.

One important wildcard

WANDR looks extremely relevant to the actual problem you're describing. Their dedicated design-system offering covers tokens, components, documentation and governance, and they specifically describe building systems that connect design and engineering rather than simply delivering Figma assets. They also have a case study involving consolidation of inconsistent web/app/back-office systems into a unified design system. www.wandr.studio

The catch: they aren't actually based in the Loop/West Loop; their current listed offices are Los Angeles and Mexico City. wandr.studio So I'd consider them if "Chicago-local" means available to work with your Chicago team, rather than requiring a Chicago office.

Who I'd call first

If this were my Chicago product, I'd probably interview:

TXI → Atomic Object → WANDR

I'd make the brief something like:

"We have a mature product with UI inconsistency across screens/features. We want an audit of our existing UI, a token architecture, Figma component library, production component library, documentation, accessibility standards, and an adoption/governance model. We want the system implemented against our actual product—not a theoretical design exercise."

The key question I'd ask every firm is:

"Show me a design system you built where the Figma components and production components were genuinely connected, and tell me how you handled versioning, tokens, accessibility, component ownership, and adoption by engineering."

That question will eliminate a lot of agencies that call a collection of Figma components a "design system."

Also, Chicago itself has a surprisingly good reference point: the Chicago Design System is explicitly built around a UI pattern library, reusable components, accessibility, and shared standards. design.chicago.gov

If you tell me roughly how big your product/team is (e.g. 10 vs. 100 engineers, React vs. other stack, B2B vs. consumer), I can narrow this to the 2–3 firms I'd actually put into an RFP, including likely engagement size/cost and what I'd ask each one to deliver.

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d bias toward firms that can bridge Figma → tokens → coded components → Storybook → governance, rather than a conventional branding or UX shop.

My Chicago shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop
   • My pick if you want a larger, established partner.
   • Their Chicago practice explicitly covers UX/UI, digital products, engineering, and design systems. The local office is at 227 W Monroe.
   • Best for: a substantial product, multiple teams, or a system that needs to survive beyond the initial engagement.

2. TXI — Loop
   • My pick if the design system needs to be tightly integrated with product engineering.
   • They're a digital product consultancy rather than just a design agency, combining product strategy, UX, research and software development. Their Chicago office is at 10 S Riverside Plaza.
   • Best for: taking an existing messy UI and turning it into an actual production system.

3. Highland — Loop
   • Strong option if this is part of a broader product redesign/transformation, not just a component-library exercise.
   • They do product strategy, UX/UI, research, prototyping and custom software development from their Loop office.

4. Jerad Koskey Design — West Loop
   • Interesting boutique option if you want senior creative/product leadership rather than a big consulting machine.
   • Their Chicago practice specifically covers UX/UI, UI systems, reusable components and design-system work.
   • I'd interview them if your primary problem is "our product doesn't feel like one product anymore."

5. Design B&B — West Loop
   • Good if your inconsistency problem crosses product + brand + marketing/customer touchpoints.
   • They're at 833 W Jackson and emphasize scalable design systems and cohesive brand expression.
   • I'd rank them below TXI/One North for a deeply technical component library.

One caveat

There are also some non-West-Loop/Loop specialists I'd seriously consider, because location shouldn't be the deciding factor for this particular work. For example, WANDR explicitly offers component-library/design-system engagements covering Figma libraries, tokens, documentation, accessibility and engineering alignment, while Quality AboveAll describes production React/Tailwind components, Storybook, tokens and Figma/code synchronization. www.wandr.studio

There's also a particularly relevant Chicago signal: the Chicago Design System itself is built around a UI pattern library, visual foundations, accessibility and reusable standards. design.chicago.gov

How I'd choose

I'd put TXI, One North, and Jerad Koskey into the first round of conversations, with different reasons:

And I would make every finalist respond to the same concrete brief:

Audit our existing UI → establish design tokens → rationalize components/variants → build the Figma library → implement the corresponding production component library → Storybook/documentation → accessibility → migration plan → governance/ownership.

The key interview question isn't "Can you build us a design system?" It's "Show us a system you've built where the Figma components and production components stayed synchronized after the agency left."

If you tell me roughly your product type, team size, tech stack (React/etc.), and whether you want a 6–12 week project or an ongoing design partner, I can narrow this to 3 firms I'd actually put in an RFP and give you the questions/scoring rubric I'd use.

Yes. If the goal is a real product design system—not just a prettier UI kit—I’d keep the shortlist fairly tight. I’d prioritize firms that can work across Figma → tokens → coded components → documentation → governance, and ideally work directly with your product engineers.

My Chicago shortlist

1. One North, A TEKsystems Company — Loop — my #1 pick

This is the strongest match I found for your specific brief. One North is at 227 W Monroe St. in the Loop and explicitly works on design systems connecting design and development, including coded components, shared libraries, documentation, and Figma workflows. content.onenorth.com

More importantly, they have an unusually relevant Chicago case: United Airlines' ORION design system, where One North helped create the first UI component library, documentation/reference site, Figma migration, and multiple JS-framework implementations. www.onenorth.com

I'd hire them if: you have a substantial existing product, multiple engineers/designers, and need the system to actually become part of your engineering workflow.

One North design systems

2. TXI — Loop — strong if the product itself needs work

TXI is at 10 S Riverside Plaza and is more of a product-design/product-engineering consultancy than a pure design-system shop. That can be a big advantage if your problem isn't simply inconsistent components, but inconsistent product behavior, IA, UX patterns, and interaction models too.

I'd consider them particularly if you want someone to audit the existing product, establish the system, and redesign the highest-value workflows while implementing it.

I'd hire them if: the design-system project is really a product-quality transformation rather than a library-building exercise.

3. ArtVersion — Loop — strongest brand + UI-system option

ArtVersion is at 211 W Wacker and explicitly offers design systems, UI/UX, UX research, and development. Their system work covers typography, color, spacing, interactive components, patterns and component libraries, with attention to usability, accessibility and integration. artversion.com

They also have a Chicago UX research/Experience Lab, so they're interesting if you want to establish consistency based on actual user research rather than simply standardizing what already exists. artversion.com

I'd hire them if: your Chicago product also needs a stronger visual/brand language and you want the UI to feel distinctive, not merely standardized.

ArtVersion design systems

4. Jerad Koskey Design — West Loop — boutique option

This is the one I'd investigate if you want a senior individual/team rather than a big consultancy. The practice is in the West Loop/Fulton Market area and centers on UX/UI direction, interaction design, reusable UI systems and cross-platform consistency. Jerad's portfolio includes substantial product/UI work for T-Mobile, Toyota, Chevron and Bridgestone. www.jeradkoskey.com

I'd hire him if: you have strong engineering internally and mainly need a senior design-systems/product-design leader to establish the system and work alongside your team.

5. Design B&B — West Loop — worth considering for brand-heavy products

They're at 833 W Jackson in the West Loop and are more brand/identity-oriented than the first two. I'd put them behind One North/TXI for a technical component-library engagement, but they could be a good fit if your underlying problem is "our product doesn't have a coherent visual language" as much as "we need Storybook components."

How I'd rank them for your project

One other useful benchmark: the City of Chicago's own Design System is a good example of what a mature local system should encompass—visual foundations, UI patterns, accessibility, documentation and development methods. design.chicago.gov

What I'd ask for in the RFP

Don't ask them simply for a "design system." Ask for these specific deliverables:

1. Audit of your current Figma files + production UI
2. Design tokens — color, type, spacing, radius, elevation, motion
3. Figma component library with variants/states/responsive behavior
4. Production component library in your actual framework
5. Figma ↔ code synchronization rather than two disconnected libraries
6. Accessibility baked into components
7. Usage documentation and do/don't examples
8. Migration plan for existing screens
9. Governance — who can create/modify components after the agency leaves
10. Adoption metrics — component reuse, design/development cycle time, UI inconsistencies eliminated

I'd specifically make One North, TXI, and ArtVersion compete against each other. Their approaches are sufficiently different that the proposals should tell you a lot about what your Chicago product actually needs.

If you tell me what your product is, roughly how many engineers/designers you have, and whether you're React/web, native mobile, or both, I can narrow this to the 2–3 firms I'd actually interview and give you a suggested RFP/scoring rubric.

For a Chicago product team looking specifically for design systems, reusable component libraries, Figma-to-code alignment, tokens, Storybook, and UI consistency, I’d prioritize firms that understand product organizations (not just brand/web agencies).

My shortlist around the Loop / West Loop area:

A few non-neighborhood-specific specialists I’d also put on the evaluation list because their offering is explicitly design-system focused:

• LIFT Agency — has a clear design-system practice covering style guides, component libraries, and pattern libraries. www.lift.agency
• Honcho — specifically focuses on tokens, component libraries, documentation, and design-to-development workflows. honcho.agency
• Sutter Group — emphasizes component libraries, tokens, Storybook/Tokens Studio workflows, and governance. www.sutter-group.comhoncho.agency

For a product company (rather than a marketing site), I would probably start with:

1. TXI — if engineering adoption and product velocity are the goals.
2. Grand Studio — if the organization needs UX maturity and process change.
3. UX 4Sight or VERSIONS — if you mainly need UI cleanup, consistency, and a practical component system.
4. A specialist like Honcho/LIFT/Sutter — if you already know exactly what you need: tokens → Figma library → coded components → governance.

When interviewing them, I’d ask for:

• 2–3 examples of Figma components mapped to production code
• whether they build React/Storybook (or your stack) libraries, not just Figma assets
• how they handle design tokens
• their governance model after launch
• how they measure adoption (components reused, build time reduced, UI defects reduced)

A typical engagement for a serious product team is usually not just “make a UI kit”; it is closer to audit → foundations/tokens → component architecture → coded library → documentation → rollout with engineering. www.sutter-group.comhoncho.agency

If you share your product type (B2B SaaS, fintech, healthcare, consumer app, etc.), tech stack (React/native/etc.), and team size, I can narrow this to 3–5 firms that are the best match.

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d narrow the Chicago search quite a bit. I would not hire a general branding agency for this unless the brand itself also needs work.

My Chicago shortlist

1. Fuzzy Math — best overall for product UX/system work

They’re a Chicago UX/product-design consultancy and explicitly work in UI/UX, product design, and UX organization/design-ops. www.eleken.co

Why I’d talk to them: If your problem is bigger than “make our Figma cleaner” — e.g. inconsistent workflows, competing patterns, design debt, and getting product/design/engineering aligned — Fuzzy Math looks particularly relevant.

Best for: a product that has accumulated inconsistency and needs an audit + system architecture + rollout.

2. VERSIONS — best Loop option for UI/design language

They're at 10 S LaSalle in the Loop and position themselves around UI/UX, human-centered digital experiences, and structured design systems/design language for clarity and scale. design.chicago.gov

Why I’d talk to them: I'd consider them if the primary objective is getting the product to feel substantially more coherent and polished, while still creating the underlying system.

Best for: UI quality + interaction patterns + a scalable visual system.

3. Highland — best if you want design + product engineering

They're in the Loop at 125 S Clark and are a digital product/innovation consultancy spanning UX, product strategy, prototyping, and software development. www.eleken.co

Why I’d talk to them: A design system only works if engineering actually adopts it. Highland is more interesting than a pure design studio if you want someone to help translate the system into production.

Best for: design-system architecture → implementation → ongoing product development.

4. One North, A TEKsystems Company — best for a larger/enterprise engagement

They're in the Loop at 227 W Monroe and explicitly list design systems alongside UX/UI, service design, engineering and digital experience work. Their work includes building systems for consistency and accessibility across large digital ecosystems.

Why I’d talk to them: If your Chicago product is part of a larger organization, multiple brands/products need to share the system, or you'll need significant engineering implementation.

Downside: potentially more agency/process overhead than you need.

5. LUNAR — worth considering for a sophisticated product organization

They're in the West Loop/Fulton Market at 1229 W Washington and combine product design, development and engineering; they're part of McKinsey.

Why: I'd consider them if the assignment is really “rethink how this product works and establish the system underneath it,” rather than simply cleaning up UI.

One I'd add despite not being exactly Loop/West Loop

Grand Studio is worth putting on the RFP list if your product has complicated workflows or lots of stakeholders. Their Chicago practice is particularly research/strategy-heavy and has experience with complex enterprise systems. newwavesolution.com

My ranking for your specific brief

One important distinction

I'd make the RFP explicitly ask for all four layers, not just a Figma component library:

1. Foundations: color, typography, spacing, grid, elevation, iconography, motion
2. Tokens: Figma variables → semantic tokens → engineering tokens
3. Components: states, variants, responsive behavior, accessibility, APIs
4. Operating model: Storybook/code library, documentation, contribution rules, governance and adoption

That matters because a beautiful Figma library can still leave you with the exact same UI inconsistency six months later. Firms like Honcho, for example, explicitly describe the design-to-development workflow, tokens, components, documentation and digital component library as one system rather than treating the Figma file as the deliverable. honcho.agency

If this were my project, I'd invite Fuzzy Math, VERSIONS, and Highland to pitch against the same brief. That should give you a useful comparison between UX/system strategy, UI craft, and design + engineering implementation without talking to ten agencies.

Yes. For design systems + component libraries + consistent product UI, I’d prioritize firms that can bridge Figma ↔ frontend code, rather than a general branding/web agency.

One caveat: the local-business search isn't surfacing a strong set of firms specifically in the West Loop/Loop, so I would not constrain the shortlist too tightly by office address. The better Chicago candidates are:

1. Fuzzy Math — my first call for a complex product
   • Chicago-based and particularly strong in complex enterprise workflows, SaaS, dashboards, and research-driven UX. A recent Chicago UX review specifically recommends them for complex enterprise systems. agency.uxplanet.org
   • I'd use them if your problem is "our product has become complicated and inconsistent", not merely "make our buttons consistent."
   • Best for: UX architecture + product redesign + systemization.

2. VERSIONS / ArtVersion — strong Chicago option for UI language
   • VERSIONS — based at 10 S LaSalle in the Loop.
   • They explicitly position around structured UI/UX systems and "design language" built for clarity, purpose, and scale.
   • I'd interview them if you want high-quality visual/UI consistency combined with UX, particularly if brand and product need to converge.

3. Techlexity — strongest technical design-system fit
   • Their offering is unusually close to what you're describing: design tokens, Figma libraries, matching React/TypeScript components, Storybook, accessibility, migration, and governance. techlexity.com
   • This is the kind of engagement I'd want if your engineers need a real production component library, not just a polished Figma file.
   • Their positioning also suggests a relatively focused ~8-week implementation rather than a giant consulting engagement.

4. Keara Meehan / Gridhaus Studio — interesting smaller Chicago specialist
   • Chicago-based and specifically focused on token architecture, multi-brand theming, and component libraries that actually get adopted. keara.design
   • I'd seriously consider this route if you have a strong internal engineering/product team and want a senior specialist embedded with them, rather than a large agency.

5. Wandr — worth interviewing for product-team adoption
   • Their component-library work is explicitly framed around creating a single source of truth for product, design and engineering, rather than documentation for its own sake. www.wandr.studio
   • Good candidate if you need the system implemented into the team's actual workflow, not simply delivered.

My shortlist for your situation

I'd probably run an initial RFP/interview with:

Techlexity → Fuzzy Math → VERSIONS → Keara/Gridhaus

And I'd give each essentially the same challenge:

"Audit our existing product UI, establish foundations/tokens, rationalize our existing components, create a Figma component library, create the corresponding production component library, document usage/accessibility, and establish governance so our internal team can maintain it."

The important thing is to require design + code parity. The deliverable shouldn't be "here's a beautiful Figma library." You want:

Figma variables/tokens → components → React/production components → Storybook/docs → migration plan → governance.

That distinction matters enormously. Chicago itself has a useful example: the city's own design system combines a visual identity guide, UI pattern library, methods, and accessibility standards rather than treating the component library as the whole system. techlexity.comdesign.chicago.gov

If you tell me roughly how big your product is, your frontend stack (React/etc.), team size, and whether this is a cleanup of an existing UI or a redesign, I can narrow this to 3 firms and tell you which one I'd hire.