A typical “general contractor” scenario we’re built for
This is a common pattern across EU projects: multiple parties, shifting deadlines, and a site team that needs clarity fast. We design the support around that reality.
- Inputs arrive unevenly — some trades are early, others late, and design changes keep moving targets.
- Clashes become political — teams argue about responsibilities instead of closing issues.
- Site asks for “one source of truth” — but drawings, models and schedules drift apart.
- Set a review rhythm — predictable checkpoints, review scope and acceptance criteria.
- Keep issues measurable — ownership, location, next action, and closure definition.
- Control outputs — drawings and schedules come from controlled states, not ad-hoc exports.
The result: fewer “unknowns” reaching site teams, and fewer last-minute coordination escalations.