Why Nobody on Site Agrees on the Schedule
On most sites the schedule exists in four versions: the master programme, the foreman's whiteboard, the subcontractor's own plan, and whatever was agreed verbally that morning. Progress is reported by phone and photograph into a group chat, and by the weekly call nobody can say which version is current.
The cost is not the disagreement itself but what it hides. A three-day slip on one trade is absorbed quietly until it collides with a delivery that was booked against a different version of the programme, at which point it becomes a fortnight. The material to leave in the source document is the commercial layer: contract values, retention terms, and delay penalties are exactly what a competitor and a claims consultant would both like to see.
The platform is introduced across eight scenes: two on the four-version problem as a site experiences it, one on capturing progress from a phone at the point of work, two on how photographs and task updates become one record, one on the schedule view that everyone is looking at, one on what the client or owner sees, and one on what the first week of adoption looks like.
.PNG)
.PNG)
.PNG)
