"How long will my website redesign take?" is among the first questions clients ask. The answer depends on scope, complexity, team availability, and decision-making speed. Understanding typical timelines and what affects them helps set realistic expectations and plan accordingly.
Website redesign timelines vary by scope:
Small business sites (10-20 pages): 8-12 weeks. Mid-sized websites (30-75 pages): 12-16 weeks.
Large websites (100+ pages): 16-24 weeks. Enterprise sites with complex integrations: 6-12 months.
These timelines assume: engaged client providing timely feedback (3-5 business days per review round), content ready or provided on schedule, standard features without extensive custom development, and typical approval processes.
Projects can extend 30-50% beyond these ranges if: multiple stakeholders cause delayed decisions, content isn't ready, extensive custom features required, or scope expands during project.
Rush projects can compress timelines by 25-30% but may sacrifice strategic thinking, require premium pricing, or increase stress.
Quality work requires appropriate time—beware agencies promising 50-page custom redesigns in 4 weeks.
Typical website redesign phases (for mid-sized site):
Discovery & Strategy (2-3 weeks):
Stakeholder interviews, competitive analysis, user research, technical audit, goals definition. Information Architecture & Sitemap (1-2 weeks):
Site structure, navigation planning, content organization. Wireframing & UX Design (2-3 weeks):
Layout planning, user flow design, functionality mapping. Visual Design (3-4 weeks):
Homepage design, interior template designs, responsive layouts, design revisions. Development (6-8 weeks):
Front-end coding, CMS integration, custom functionality, responsive implementation. Content Migration & Integration (1-2 weeks, can overlap with development):
Transferring content, setting up integrations, populating CMS. Testing & QA (2 weeks):
Cross-browser testing, mobile testing, accessibility testing, bug fixes. Launch & Post-Launch Support (1-2 weeks):
Deployment, monitoring, immediate fixes.
Total: 18-26 weeks. Phases can overlap (content while developing, QA while building) to optimize timeline.
Common delay causes include: Client feedback delays (waiting 2+ weeks for approval adds weeks to timeline), content not ready (agencies can't proceed without copy/images), scope creep (adding features mid-project), decision-making challenges (multiple stakeholders, conflicting feedback), incomplete discovery (discovering requirements mid-project), third-party dependencies (waiting for API access, vendor contracts), technical complications (unexpected legacy system issues), resource constraints (client team too busy to participate), multiple revision rounds (endless tweaking), holiday/vacation interruptions, and stakeholder turnover (new decision-makers want changes).
Mitigation strategies: assign dedicated client contact, prepare content in advance, lock scope with change order process, establish decision-making authority, thorough discovery phase, obtain third-party access early, realistic timelines with buffer, commit to feedback schedules in contract, limit revision rounds per phase, and plan around holiday periods.
Projects with engaged, decisive clients complete 30-40% faster than those with feedback delays.
Yes, through strategic approaches: Rapid impact project scope (focus on essential pages, 6-10 weeks), concurrent workstreams (design and content strategy simultaneous), prepared content (have copy/images ready before starting), single decision-maker (avoid committee approvals), limited revision rounds (2-3 rounds per phase vs. unlimited), phased launch (MVP first, enhancements later), template-based approach (customize templates vs. custom design), dedicated client team (respond within 24-48 hours), pre-approved brand guidelines (skip extensive design exploration), and premium timeline pricing (agencies prioritize with 20-30% fee increase).
Realistic compression: 25-30% faster than standard timeline. Compressing beyond this risks: reduced strategic thinking, limited design exploration, technical debt, rushed testing causing post-launch bugs, and team burnout affecting quality.
What NOT to do: skip discovery (leads to misaligned solutions), eliminate testing (guarantees launch problems), or pressure unrealistic timelines (quality suffers).
Better approach: start sooner with realistic timeline than rush inferior product.
Client time commitment varies by role and phase:
Project sponsor/decision-maker: 10-15 hours total (kickoff meeting, strategy review, design approvals, final approval).
Subject matter experts: 15-25 hours (discovery interviews, content review, testing feedback).
Content team: 40-80 hours (content creation, revisions, CMS population, if you're providing content).
IT/technical team: 10-20 hours (integration planning, technical reviews, launch support).
Throughout project: weekly status meetings (30-60 minutes), design feedback rounds (2-4 hours per round, typically 3-5 rounds), development reviews (1-2 hours), UAT testing (5-10 hours), and training (2-4 hours).
Total client time: 75-150 hours across 3-5 team members over project duration.
Agencies need responses within agreed timelines (typically 3-5 business days) to maintain schedule.
Projects fail when: clients are "too busy" to participate, feedback takes 2-3 weeks, or stakeholders constantly changing.
Budget client time accordingly—this is business-critical work requiring real commitment.
Timeline overruns have causes and solutions:
Client-caused delays (feedback delays, content not ready, scope changes):
Project extends but typically no additional cost unless significant. Agency-caused delays (resource constraints, underestimated complexity, mismanagement):
Agency should absorb costs and recover timeline. Mutual delays (unforeseen technical challenges, third-party issues, evolving requirements):
Negotiate timeline and cost adjustments.
Contract should specify: how delays are handled, whether timeline extensions affect cost, change order process for scope additions, and mutual responsibilities for staying on schedule.
Communication is key: agencies should flag potential delays early (not surprise you at deadline), propose recovery plans, and adjust resource allocation to recover time when possible.
If project consistently misses milestones with no recovery plan, that's a red flag about agency capability. Most delays are preventable through: thorough discovery, realistic initial timeline, clear communication, prompt feedback, and professional project management.
Both approaches have merits:
All-at-once launch: Advantages include consistent user experience across entire site, single disruption period, comprehensive testing of integrated features, and aligned launch marketing. Disadvantages include longer timeline before anything goes live, higher risk if issues arise, and all-or-nothing deadline pressure.
Phased launch: Advantages include faster time to value (homepage and key pages live sooner), reduced risk (test and learn before full rollout), budget spreading across quarters, and ability to incorporate user feedback between phases. Disadvantages include potential inconsistency during transition, SEO complications if not managed properly, and user confusion with mixed old/new pages.
Choose all-at-once when: site is small (under 30 pages), brand consistency is critical, timeline allows (3-6 months acceptable), or features are highly interdependent.
Choose phased when: large site (75+ pages), budget constraints require spreading costs, urgency for visible improvement, or learning from initial launch informs later phases.
Common phased approach: Phase 1 (homepage, key service pages, contact), Phase 2 (remaining services, about, resources), Phase 3 (blog migration, advanced features). Ensure proper planning to avoid permanent "Phase 1" limbo.
Plan 2-4 weeks between contract signing and project kickoff for: Contract finalization and signature, deposit payment processing, agency resource allocation (assembling team, blocking calendars), client preparation (gathering materials, scheduling stakeholder interviews), technical setup (credentials, access provisioning), and kickoff meeting scheduling.
Rushing into immediate start (next day) often causes: inadequate preparation, resource conflicts, missed discovery details, and disorganized beginning. However, waiting too long (6+ weeks) can cause: loss of momentum, team reassignments, changing priorities, or outdated strategy.
Ideal timeline: Sign contract, schedule kickoff for 2-3 weeks out, use interim for preparation (both sides), start project with all parties ready.
If urgency requires faster start, communicate this during agency selection—agencies can often accommodate 1-2 week starts for premium fee, but quality agencies typically have 2-4 week queue from proposal acceptance to availability.
A $100,000 website redesign typically requires 16-24 weeks (4-6 months):
Discovery & Strategy: 3 weeks.
Information Architecture: 2 weeks.
Wireframing & UX: 3 weeks.
Visual Design: 4 weeks.
Development: 8-10 weeks.
Content & Integration: 2-3 weeks (concurrent with development).
Testing & QA: 2-3 weeks.
Launch & Stabilization: 2 weeks.
This budget level typically includes: 8-12 unique page templates, custom features, 2-3 third-party integrations, 50-100 pages of content migration, comprehensive accessibility compliance, and strategic approach to SEO. Projects at this budget with experienced agencies rarely complete faster than 16 weeks—adequate time for quality work requires proper discovery, thoughtful design, robust development, and thorough testing. Promises of 8-10 week completion at this budget suggest: unrealistic timeline, inexperienced agency, or hidden scope limitations. Better to start with realistic 20-week timeline and finish early than promise 12 weeks and deliver late.
Plan around these schedule considerations:
Major holidays (Thanksgiving, Christmas/New Year's, July 4th): Expect 1-2 week slowdowns when stakeholders and teams are unavailable.
Summer vacations: June-August often has rolling absences affecting feedback loops.
Year-end budget/planning: November-December organizations focused on budgets, making decisions slow.
Mitigation strategies: Plan launches outside holiday windows (avoid December launches), build 1-2 week buffer for holiday periods, discuss key vacation schedules upfront, assign backup decision-makers, front-load work before known absence periods, and communicate schedule impacts early.
Optimal launch timing: February-May or September-October (avoid summer and holiday slowdowns).
Worst timing: Starting projects in late October (hits holidays), launching in late December (support issues during vacations), or mid-summer with scattered vacations.
Realistic agency planning accounts for these periods—be skeptical of timelines showing December delivery for October start.