Elevate Construction official logo
Contact us

Category: Uncategorized

It’s about People, Feat. Nelson Atagi

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 22 min

Cleanliness Is Your First Win: Why Superintendents Who Care Start Here

The first thing Nelson Atugi noticed when he walked onto his new site wasn’t the schedule. It wasn’t the budget. It wasn’t even the safety program. It was the mess. Trash scattered everywhere. Materials piled in walkways. Equipment blocking trade flow. The kind of chaos that tells you nobody’s leading.

So he gave the foremen a couple days to clean it up. They didn’t. So Nelson brought in a crew and cleaned house. Within a day, the site looked completely different. It felt better. And since that day, the trades have done a great job keeping it clean, organized, everything in its place. People can maneuver. Workflows improved. The whole site changed.

Here’s what most superintendents miss: cleanliness isn’t just about safety compliance or looking good for the owner. Cleanliness is about respect. It’s about giving your people a stable environment where they can actually do their work. It’s about creating wins when everything else in construction feels chaotic.

The Kitchen Test: Why Clean Matters Before You Start

Nelson explained it like this: “I like to cook. But when I go to cook, if the kitchen has stuff all over the counters, if there’s dishes in the sink, I can’t start. I just can’t do it. The whole kitchen has to be cleaned out—tables wiped off, kitchen floor swept up, and then I can start. I feel clean that I can start.”

That’s the mental game of cleanliness. It’s not about being obsessive or wasting time. It’s about clearing the mental space to actually think, plan, and execute. When your environment is chaotic, your mind is chaotic. When your site looks like nobody cares, your people feel like nobody cares about them.

Think about what happens when you walk onto a clean site versus a disaster zone. On the clean site, you can see what’s happening. You can identify problems. You can walk without tripping. Your trades can find their materials. Your workers aren’t wading through trash to get to their work area. You get a mental win before you even start the day.

On the chaotic site, you’re already behind. You’re frustrated before you solve a single problem. Your people are navigating obstacles that shouldn’t exist. Every trade partner is annoyed because their workspace is contaminated with everyone else’s mess. You’ve lost before you started.

Cleanliness is outer order creating inner calm. And in construction, where chaos is the default, that calm is the competitive advantage.

Small Wins Drive Everything Else

Nelson said something crucial: “The small things we can do to gain wins are the things that ultimately win that war. And the mental state of winning drives a lot of what we do. When we feel like we win, man, we can do amazing things.”

This is the secret most superintendents don’t understand. They think cleanliness is a “nice to have” that you get to after you solve the real problems. But cleanliness is the foundation for solving the real problems. It’s the first win that makes all the other wins possible.

When you clean a site, you’re not just removing trash. You’re sending a message: we run a professional operation here. We respect our people. We expect excellence. We don’t tolerate sloppiness. And when your trades see that message, they respond. They start picking up after themselves. They organize their materials. They take pride in their work area. The culture shifts.

Eric Thomas says “winners win, losers lose.” Winners need to know how to win. And if your site is a disaster, how does anyone know they’re winning? How does the electrician know they’re doing good work when they’re installing conduit in a trash pile? How does the drywall crew take pride in their finish when the entire floor is covered in debris?

You can’t. The mess drowns out the excellence. But when the site is clean, quality stands out. Good work is visible. People can see what they accomplished. That visibility creates motivation. That motivation creates more wins. The cycle builds.

What Cleanliness Actually Looks Like on Site

Cleanliness isn’t about perfection or making your site look like a showroom. It’s about finish-as-you-go discipline and creating functional workspaces. Here’s what that means in practice:

  • Trash gets picked up continuously, not just on Friday cleanup day, workers clean as they go, just like Nelson cleans while he cooks
  • Materials are staged in designated areas, not scattered wherever someone dropped them last
  • Walkways and egress routes stay clear so people can move without navigating obstacle courses
  • Each trade has a defined work zone and is responsible for keeping it organized
  • Delivery areas are planned and controlled so material drops don’t block other trades
  • Scrap and cutoffs get removed daily, not piled in corners to “deal with later”
  • Tool staging areas are organized so crews can find what they need without wasting time searching

This isn’t extra work. This is the work. When you plan material deliveries according to inventory buffers, you’re preventing the mess before it starts. When you define work zones in your Takt plan, you’re organizing the site by design instead of fighting chaos by reaction. When you hold trades accountable for their areas, you’re creating ownership instead of excuses.

Nelson’s approach was simple: he gave the foremen time to handle it themselves. When they didn’t, he brought in a crew and set the standard. Now the trades maintain it because the expectation is clear and the system supports them.

The Real Motivation: Treating Workers Like Your Own Kids

Here’s where this gets personal. Nelson said his motivation used to be ego, proving himself as a superintendent. But as he got further into the role and got to know the workers and foremen and trade partners, his mindset shifted: “It’s these guys, the ones that are putting the work in place, that really make the difference. And if we can’t support them and create a stable work environment for them, one, they don’t want to be here. So they don’t put things in properly and they don’t do it correctly and safe. So what’s the point?”

His motivation now is keeping people happy, making them feel fulfilled and valued. We spend more time with each other at work than we do with our families. Why not care for each other? Why not take care of each other and have a good time at work? When you show up, the work is hard, but at least it’s enjoyable to work with your team.

I told Nelson a story about missionaries in my local church. Every 12 weeks we get new young men serving in the area, and I realized I was taking them for granted. Then I thought: my son Reno will be out serving in six months. Would I want the local members to take him for granted? Would I want him to not have meals, to feel frustrated, to have a flat tire and nobody to help him? Would I want him to feel ignored and underappreciated?

That would break my heart. So now I’m taking care of these young men as much as I can, inviting them over, treating them to meals, giving them rides. And when Nelson was talking about the workers on his site, I got the same feeling: what if we treated the craft workers and foremen on site like we would want somebody to treat our own children?

Think about that. If your son or daughter showed up on a construction site as a laborer or apprentice electrician, how would you want the superintendent to treat them? Would you want them working in trash? Would you want them navigating unsafe conditions because nobody bothered to organize the site? Would you want them feeling disrespected and undervalued?

Hell no. You’d want them working in a clean, safe, organized environment where someone cared enough to create stability. You’d want them led by someone who saw them as a person, not just a production unit. You’d want them treated with dignity.

So why aren’t you giving that to the workers on your site right now?

Cleanliness Is Respect Made Visible

When superintendents tell me they’ve run jobs “like this” for 40 years and made money, I have one question: did all the trade partners make money? And did those workers feel respected and loved?

Because I don’t care if the GC made a little bit of profit. I want to know that the people doing the work, the ones putting their bodies on the line, the ones away from their families, the ones making your project happen, felt valued. I want to know they went home at the end of the day feeling like they mattered.

A clean site is proof you care. It’s proof you see them as people, not just labor units. It’s proof you’re willing to invest time and energy into creating an environment worthy of their effort. Cleanliness is respect made visible.

And when your people feel respected, they give you everything. They show up early. They problem-solve instead of complaining. They watch out for each other. They take pride in the work. They want to be there. That’s the culture you’re building when you prioritize cleanliness.

Nelson said it perfectly: “When we can get to know somebody, you can’t want to see them hurt. You can’t want to see them unproductive. You can’t see them not want to be successful in life or at any small task they’re doing.”

Get to know your people. Care about them like you’d care about your own kids. Create an environment that shows them they matter. Start with cleanliness. It’s the first win that makes all the other wins possible. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

FAQ

Q: How do I get trades to maintain cleanliness without me policing them constantly?

Set the standard, make expectations clear, and hold people accountable. When Nelson cleaned his site, he didn’t just pick up trash, he showed everyone what the new normal looked like. Then he made it clear that maintaining that standard was part of the job. If a trade isn’t keeping their area clean, it shows up in their performance grade. Winners want to know how to win, so put the hoop up and measure it. Most trades will rise to the expectation once they see you’re serious about it.

Q: What if I don’t have time to focus on cleanliness with everything else I’m managing?

You don’t have time NOT to focus on it. A messy site costs you more time than a clean one. Workers waste time searching for materials in piles of trash. Trades trip over debris and get injured. Inspectors flag safety violations. Rework happens because quality issues are hidden in the mess. Cleanliness isn’t extra work—it’s the foundation that makes all other work faster and safer. Build it into your daily rhythm and it becomes automatic.

Q: How do I shift the culture on a site that’s been chaotic for months?

Do what Nelson did: bring in a crew and clean house in one day. Create a dramatic before-and-after so everyone sees the difference. Then communicate clearly: this is the new standard, and we’re maintaining it. Hold daily or weekly accountability checks. Recognize trades that keep their areas clean. Address violations immediately. Culture shifts when people see you’re committed and when the new way feels better than the old way.

Q: What’s the connection between cleanliness and safety?

Clean sites are safer sites because hazards are visible, walkways are clear, and people aren’t navigating obstacle courses to do their work. But the deeper connection is respect. When you keep a site clean, you’re telling your workers “I value your safety enough to create an environment where you can work without unnecessary risk.” That respect creates buy-in. Workers who feel valued watch out for each other and follow safety protocols because they know you care about them going home to their families.

Q: How do I balance cleanliness with production pressure when we’re behind schedule?

Clean sites are MORE productive, not less. When materials are organized, workers aren’t wasting time searching. When walkways are clear, trades aren’t tripping or waiting for paths to open up. When the site is stable, rework decreases and quality improves. The idea that you have to choose between cleanliness and production is a false choice created by poor planning. If you’re behind schedule, stabilize the site first, including cleanliness, and then execute from that stable foundation. Chaos compounds delays. Stability creates flow.

On we go.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

We Need Superintendents, not Security Guards!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 31 min

Stop Being a Security Guard: What Real Superintendents Actually Do

Here’s the deal: if your superintendent spends half the day in a forklift, running to Home Depot, or pumping water out of a trench, you don’t have a superintendent. You have an expensive security guard pointing people in different directions. And that’s costing you production, safety, and the respect of every trade partner on your site.

I’ve seen it everywhere. The super who jumps in equipment “just this one time.” The foreman who answers every question instead of teaching people to find their own answers. The field leader who stays buried in doing instead of leading. They’re working hard, running constantly, and wondering why the project never gets ahead of schedule.

The problem isn’t effort. The problem is they’re in the wrong role doing the wrong work.

The Real Problem: Addiction to Chaos and Certainty

Let’s name what’s actually happening. Superintendents and foremen can get addicted to the adrenaline of chaos. Someone once posted that online and got pushback, “That’s childish. That’s not real.” But it’s absolutely true. We get addicted to those chemicals that rush, that feeling of being needed in the moment.

Think about the foreman who came up through the trades. They know how to unload that delivery. They know how to operate the equipment. They know how to pump out water. They’re getting certainty from doing things they already know how to do. They’re getting significance from being the hero who saves the day. But they don’t know how to plan a schedule. They don’t know how to lead a huddle. They don’t know how to create stability. They don’t know how to manage trade flow.

So where do they go? Back to what gives them certainty and significance. Back to doing instead of leading. And every time they do, they’re abandoning their actual role.

This ties directly to the six basic human needs: certainty, significance, variety, love and connection, growth, and contribution. When someone focuses too much on certainty and significance, they’ll spend all day on equipment and at Home Depot instead of properly delegating, planning, and executing the work. The system failed them by promoting them without training. But now they’re failing everyone else by refusing to step into the role they were given.

The Construction Industry Created This Problem

Here’s what happened: construction has spent decades saying “Hey worker, go be a foreman. Hey foreman, go be a superintendent” without any training. It’s ridiculous. We take great workers and throw them into leadership positions with zero preparation, then blame them when they don’t know what to do.

I’ve worked with companies that trained like crazy when they were $1.5 billion in annual revenue. As they grew larger, training decreased. That makes no sense. You need more capability and more capacity to expand, not less. You cannot scale without developing your people.

And let me be clear about something: we don’t have a worker problem or a foreman problem in this industry. We have a construction culture problem. We have a process problem. Companies are not providing the right training, the right support, the right environments. They’re not taking care of workers. Then they blame people instead of fixing the broken system.

If your company doesn’t train, if you don’t create stability, if you don’t respect trade partners and workers, you’re part of the problem. The United States has entered an economy of scarcity. There are contractors out there using and abusing trade partners, asking for more manpower and materials because they’re not obeying production laws, slowing everything down because they won’t do any training. These are the folks hurting the industry right now.

What Real Superintendents Actually Do

A superintendent is a military commander. A superintendent is a general. Not a security guard. Not someone pointing people in directions. Not someone doing the work of others.

Your job as a superintendent is this: study your drawings every day, be in your schedule planning and executing work every day, lead huddles and communicate every day, and take reflection walks every day. If you’re not doing those things every day, you’re not a builder you’re a broker. And anybody can be a broker. You could take an Amazon delivery driver and put them in a superintendent role as a broker and they’d be just as successful as you are.

Think about that. If all you’re doing is pointing and saying go here, go there, go here, go there—if you’re always running around like a chicken with your head cut off you’re not adding value. You’re not being a superintendent. You’re being an expensive traffic director.

The three builder habits define how you should spend your time: studying your drawings even if you don’t like to, being in your schedule even if you don’t like to, and doing reflection walks and leading people even if you don’t like to. Everything else interspersed throughout your day should be meetings, fanatical communication, directing and coaching and mentoring other people, having hard conversations, solving problems, and building your team.

That’s it. That’s your job. You are paid to watch. You are paid to see. You are paid to think. You are paid to plan. You are paid to execute. You are not paid to work. You want to work? Go be a worker. They’re great people. I respect workers. They make us money. But your job is in a support role.

Flip that organizational triangle in your mind. Workers are at the top putting in the work. Foremen are a layer below supporting them. Superintendents are a layer below supporting foremen. Every other position is a layer below, a layer below, a layer below. If you get out of your support role, you’re letting everyone fall.

Signs You’re Operating as a Security Guard, Not a Superintendent

Watch for these warning signals that tell you you’ve slipped out of your leadership role and into escapism mode:

  • You’re the first person people call when equipment needs to be moved or deliveries need to be unloaded
  • You spend more time in a truck going to Home Depot than you do in your schedule
  • You get interrupted eight or more times per hour with questions that workers should be able to answer themselves
  • You feel a rush of significance when someone says “can you just help me with this one thing”
  • Your phone rings constantly because people have learned you’ll drop everything to solve their problems
  • You haven’t studied the drawings in three days because you’ve been “too busy putting out fires”
  • Trade partners come to you before researching drawings or asking their own office
  • You’re physically exhausted at the end of every day but can’t point to any planning or leadership work you completed

These are symptoms of the same disease: you’re getting your certainty and significance from doing instead of leading. You’re running away from the hard work of building teams, holding hard conversations, and creating systems. Every time you jump in that forklift, you’re telling yourself “at least I know how to do this” instead of learning how to do what you were actually hired to do.

When “Helping” Is Actually Escapism

Getting in a forklift is escapism. Getting in a piece of equipment is escapism. Pumping out water is escapism. Going to Home Depot is escapism. It’s a way for you to run away from doing your job.

When I see a superintendent get up and walk out eight times in an hour to answer questions, I automatically know they don’t have any idea what they’re doing. There’s no reason that kind of instability should be on your project site. They’re selfishly playing savior to get the significance and certainty from being needed.

The antidote is to actually learn how to be a foreman or superintendent. Once you learn that, you tell your trade partner: “Have you researched the drawings? Have you asked your office? Okay, I have time at 3:00 to help you, but right now I’m focused on leader standard work.” You hold them accountable.

And here’s the truth: if you don’t have trade partners grade you on your performance, and if you don’t grade the performance of trade partners, you’re not doing your job. Winners like to win and they need to know how to win. When you refuse to measure performance, what you’re saying is “I’ve got a bunch of losers on my site that I’m trying to play savior with, and I don’t dare put the hoop up because I know they’re not going to make the shots.”

I believe in people. People are smart. People are incredible. People can rise to the occasion. Winners like to win. Winners like to know how to win. So grade your contractors on site. Make expectations clear. Your winners will start to learn how to win, and the people choosing to lose will realize they’re not going to survive in your culture.

Boundaries and Leader Standard Work

Successful superintendents set boundaries. My boundaries are: I’m not going to let you waste my time. I’m not going to do your work for you. You are going to perform and here are the expectations. You’re going to be safe. You’re going to be clean. You’re going to be organized. You will have scheduled deliveries according to material inventory buffers.

A superintendent has to protect their leader standard work. When somebody from the bottom of the ship tells the captain to come down and sweep the deck, the captain has to have the guts to say “Nope, actually I’m going to steer the ship away from icebergs.”

The superintendent who doesn’t expect foremen to do their own job doesn’t respect people. If you think that foreman is too stupid or unable to go do their own job, you don’t respect people. Every worker on site can wear their safety glasses. Every foreman can do their reports and plan their work. Everybody can research their own answers before wasting your time. They’re smart human beings. Everyone can follow the rules. Everyone can fit into the system. Everyone can earn an A.

When you see a superintendent playing savior with people, they’re pushing other people down to lower levels of existence and disrespecting them, elevating themselves into a false sense of importance. They don’t believe in their people.

What Superintendent Boundaries Actually Look Like

Here’s what it means to protect your role and stay in your lane as a field leader:

  • When a foreman asks a question they should know, you respond: “Have you checked the drawings? Have you called your office? Come back at 3:00 if you still need help.”
  • When a delivery shows up and the foreman asks you to unload it, you say: “That’s your crew’s responsibility. Get your operator or call for one.”
  • When someone interrupts your planning time with a non-emergency, you redirect: “I’m in leader standard work right now. Let’s talk at the huddle or schedule time this afternoon.”
  • When a trade partner hasn’t done their homework, you hold them accountable: “This is the third time this week. We’re tracking this in your performance grade.”
  • When your project manager asks you to run to the supply house, you delegate: “I’ll have the assistant superintendent handle that. I’m working on next week’s schedule.”
  • When equipment needs moving and you’re the only one who can operate it, you stop and ask: “Why haven’t we cross-trained anyone else? This is a training failure.”

These boundaries aren’t about being difficult or unhelpful. They’re about respecting your role, respecting the capabilities of your team, and protecting the planning and leadership work that only you can do. Every time you say yes to do someone else’s job, you’re saying no to do your own.

The Dichotomy of Leadership

Here’s the balance: you have to speak up, you have to lead, you have to build a team, you have to hold people accountable, you have to coach and mentor, you have to lead meetings, and you have to communicate—but you have to do it in a non-asshole way.

You cannot go around yelling at people and blaming people and thinking you’re being a superintendent. That’s not how it works. We have a no-asshole rule. You are not allowed to be an asshole and be a leader.

You have to create stability. You have to create order. You have to create connection. You need to take care of the bathrooms. You need to have a nice lunchroom. You need to have huddles. You need to listen to your trade partners. You need to make sure you have collaborative planning cycles in your weekly work plan. You need to create trade flow. You need to listen. You need to apologize. You need to forgive. You need to be that person who supports and respects people.

When you do that, when you say “I am here for our team, I am here for them, I am a support system, I love them, I care for them, I take care of them, I am their number one support, I am bought into them, I want them to succeed, I respect them, I honor them”, then you will get out of the Home Depot truck, you will get out of the loader, you will get out of the forklift, and you will start connecting and leading people in a dynamic and professional way.

What This Means for Companies and Individuals

For companies: stop blaming people. Fix the process. Fix the culture. Provide training. We have to get professional development to our people and not allow security guard behavior. When you start doing this, some of your security guards will quit. Your future superintendents will elevate and rise to the occasion. That’s the goal.

For individuals: stop being a victim. If you don’t have training, you owe yourself an explanation. If you’re not getting that promotion, you need to put yourself on punishment. The higher you get into leadership positions, the more you get to do the gut-wrenchingly hard things. That’s what leadership means.

A superintendent is a professional project management role. You cannot not learn what you need to learn to succeed. You need to switch your focus to growth and contribution. Stop taking and start giving. Learn your role. Study the drawings. Master scheduling and production laws. Learn building information modeling. Learn survey. Learn lift drawings. Learn fundamental superintendent duties. Keep a to-do list. Fill out daily reports properly.

Your friends are the people who tell you hard things. You have got to stop security guard behavior. You need to become a superintendent. And for those of you who want to be real field leaders, who want to create stability, protect trade flow, and build teams that succeed, that is why I do this podcast. That is why I’m in business. You are my why. I am here for you, and I am going to do everything in my power to elevate you. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

FAQ

Q: How do I know if I’m doing “security guard work” versus real superintendent work?

Ask yourself: am I doing things anyone could do, or am I doing things only a trained leader can do? If you’re unloading deliveries, running equipment, or pumping water, that’s security guard work, pointing people in directions without planning or strategy. Real superintendent work is studying drawings, managing the schedule, leading huddles, coaching your team, creating stability, and protecting trade flow. If you’re physically doing the work instead of planning and leading the work, you’re in the wrong mode.

Q: What if I’m the only one on site who knows how to operate the equipment?

Then you’ve failed to train your team. Part of your job as a leader is building capability in others. If you’re the only one who can do something critical, you’ve created a single point of failure. Your job is to develop redundancy, cross-train your people, and ensure the work can happen whether you’re there or not. Jumping in “just this one time” reinforces the pattern and prevents your team from learning. Set boundaries, delegate, and invest in training.

Q: How do I transition from doing to leading if I’ve been promoted from the trades?

Start with the three builder habits: study your drawings every day, work in your schedule planning and executing work every day, and lead huddles and take reflection walks every day. Read leadership books. Listen to podcasts. Attend training like fundamental builder boot camps. Switch your focus from certainty and significance (doing what you already know) to growth and contribution (learning new skills and giving to your team). It requires a mindset shift from fixed to growth, and it won’t happen overnight, but it’s the only way to succeed in the role you’ve been given.

Q: What should I do when a foreman or trade partner asks me a question they should be able to answer themselves?

Set boundaries and hold them accountable. Ask: “Have you researched the drawings? Have you asked your office?” If not, schedule time later to help them, don’t drop everything immediately. Teach them how to find answers instead of being their answer machine. If this is a recurring problem, grade their performance and make self-sufficiency a clear expectation. You’re not helping them by doing their job for them, you’re disrespecting them by assuming they can’t do it themselves.

Q: How can companies fix this culture of superintendents doing the wrong work?

Provide training. Create clear role definitions. Implement leader standard work. Grade superintendent performance on the right metrics—not how many fires they put out, but how well they plan, communicate, create stability, and develop their teams. Stop rewarding heroics and start rewarding systems. Hold people accountable to staying in their role. And if someone refuses to stop doing security guard work after coaching and support, invite them to leave the role and find one that fits their skillset better.

On we go.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

Dependence, Feat. Hal Macomber & Felipe Engineer

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 40 min

The Production Laws Problem: Why Your Project Keeps Failing Laws You Never Learned

You’re running a project. Making decisions every day. The deck crew needs another day, so you extend just that piece of the schedule. The project falls behind, so you add more people. The electrician is waiting for information, so they start anyway and guess. Every decision seems reasonable. Practical. Based on years of experience. And every decision is violating production laws that govern how work actually flows. Laws you’ve never been taught. Laws that determine whether your project succeeds or fails regardless of how hard you work.

Here’s what Hal Macomber taught Jason Schroeder and Felipe Engineer Manriquez in St. Louis after they just walked past five scrum boards to get to a conference room on a multi-million-dollar Takt-planned project. These production laws have been around since the 1920s. A British engineer wrote about mass production and flow production. That material got into Toyota’s hands around 1945 to 1950. The rest of the world didn’t learn about it for decades. And most superintendents still don’t know these laws exist. Which means they’re violating them constantly, wondering why their projects struggle despite their best efforts.

The projects that succeed consistently aren’t led by superintendents who work harder. They’re led by people who understand the production laws that govern how work flows. Who know that Little’s Law says smaller batch sizes always produce faster throughput. Who recognize that bottlenecks are about capacity, not critical paths. Who’ve learned that variation stacks and compounds with dependence in ways that destroy projects. Who understand Kingman’s formula: cycle time multiplied by capacity utilization multiplied by variation effects equals overall duration. Who’ve discovered that fixing overburden first, then variation, then waste is the sequence that actually works.

The Problem Every Superintendent Creates

Walk onto any struggling project and you’ll find the same pattern. Decisions that seem reasonable are violating production laws. The superintendent extends just the deck schedule because that’s where the delay occurred, never recognizing that isolating one piece increases variation throughout the system. Leadership adds more people to recover schedule, never understanding that this violates Little’s Law and Brooks’s Law simultaneously. The electrician starts work without complete information because waiting seems wasteful, never seeing that this creates decision fatigue and compounds variation. Every decision makes sense in isolation. And every decision violates laws that determine project outcomes.

Most superintendents don’t recognize they’re violating production laws. They think they’re making practical decisions. Experience-based choices. Reasonable responses to field conditions. They frame intuitive management as good leadership instead of recognizing it as violation of fundamental principles. They don’t see that their “common sense” is breaking laws as real as gravity, laws that can’t be violated without consequences.

The pattern shows up everywhere in construction. The project team adjusts isolated pieces of the schedule instead of moving everything together to maintain rhythm, violating the law of variation without realizing it. Leadership focuses on eliminating waste before addressing overburden and variation, following Toyota’s misdirection instead of their actual practice. Superintendents push for one hundred percent utilization thinking efficiency equals productivity, never understanding that high utilization plus high variation creates massive delays. Everyone’s violating laws they’ve never been taught.

Think about the parade of trades in a seven-step operation. The first step finishes early but got off to a slow start. If they got off to a slow start, the second step doesn’t have as much work in process to do. They can’t do better than the slow start the previous person had. Variation compounds with dependence. If you’re reliable at a rate of 0.9, ninety percent of what you said you’d get done, 0.9 to the seventh power is a really small number. When percent promises complete drops below fifty percent, you can have people early in the process that are high, but there’s no way the painter at the end can be high because you’ve got all that compounded variation.

The painter at the end of the process bids the job to spray and back-roll the first two coats, roll the third. How often does that happen? It doesn’t. Do they lose money? No, because they bid based on experience. If they actually get to spray and back-roll the first two, they’re in the money. But it doesn’t happen because they’re at the long end of a chain that could be twenty or twenty-five or twenty-eight operations with compound dependence. That’s one of the fallacies, superintendents early in the process thinking that down the chain time can be made up. It can’t. Variation compounds.

The Failure Pattern Nobody Recognizes

This isn’t about lazy superintendents or incompetent teams. This is about violating production laws nobody taught you existed. That intuitive management breaks fundamental principles. That experience-based decisions violate laws as real as physics. That the system never equipped you with the knowledge required to succeed.

Construction culture treats intuition as sufficient for management. The superintendent who makes decisions based on feel. The project manager who relies on experience. The leadership team that trusts gut instinct. These patterns look like wisdom, like practical knowledge, like real-world expertise. And they’re dangerous because they replace systematic understanding with guesswork, production laws with hope, and knowledge with intuition that’s almost always wrong.

So superintendents make reasonable decisions that violate Little’s Law. They focus on waste elimination while ignoring overburden and variation. They push for high utilization without understanding its relationship to delay. They adjust isolated pieces of schedules without recognizing how variation stacks. They never learn that variation doesn’t offset, it stacks. That early slow starts can’t be made up later because variation compounds with dependence. That the production laws governing their work have been known for a century but never taught to them.

Nobody teaches superintendents that pursuing flow is the preferred way of doing any production work. That architects and engineers getting out of flow have the same problems, rework, losing track of what they were doing, their humanness showing up. That the law of variation is so powerful that Toyota normalizes arrival rates on highway onramps with stoplights every six seconds just to reduce variation in the rightmost lane. That Kingman’s formula explains why the middle two highway lanes during rush hour are generally better than the rightmost lane (high variation) or leftmost lane (high utilization).

A Story From the Field About Discovering Production Laws

Jason Schroeder sat down with Hal Macomber and Felipe Engineer Manriquez in St. Louis. They’d just walked past five scrum boards, five different teams using systematic approaches to manage work. Jason had been implementing production laws for three weeks without fully understanding them. His life had already changed. But he needed to understand why these things worked.

Hal started with history. These laws aren’t new. A British engineer in the 1920s wrote about mass production and flow production. Toyota got that material around 1945 to 1950. The rest of the world didn’t learn about it for decades. In 1999, Lean Construction Institute white paper number three said we must use a continuous flow approach, that’s the ground floor, with Last Planner on top to make flow work. That same year, Hal did his first Takt plan project at the Neinan Company in Fort Collins, Colorado. They completed an entire middle school in seventeen weeks using Takt planning and onsite prefabrication.

Jason interrupted, he does that, with an observation that feels revolutionary but isn’t. “I feel like we’re getting back to what was always supposed to be. When somebody says, ‘Oh, we pre-fabricated onsite,’ they act like it’s some new thing. It’s not new. The Hensel Phelps Pentagon renovation used Takt. The Empire State Building used certain things that were line-of-balance, location-based, Takt-ish. These are decades, hundreds of years ago. I think it’s what it was always supposed to be.”

Hal taught the law of variation. Every human being is born with amnesia, they don’t know what was done before them. The systems we encounter are complex. We have variation and chaos in how we procure and build. To bring order back, you need someone to increase awareness of what production laws are. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development to understand and apply production laws instead of violating them through intuition, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

He explained that Toyota teaches waste, variation, and overburden in that order. But Hal told Jim Womack in 1999: “You got it backwards. You need to do it in the other order: overburden, variation, and then waste.” Why? Because in construction, there’s already so much systemic pressure on people trying to do their best. Deming said the worker is just trying to do their best with best efforts, but it’s not enough because of how the system operates on them, sometimes operates against them. When you remove overburden from people, you create capacity to look at variation and understand how it’s wreaking havoc. Then you can get better about removing waste to enable flow because now you have breathing room.

Hal used the highway analogy to teach Kingman’s formula. During rush hour, two lanes on a four-lane highway have the highest delay: the rightmost lane (high variation from people getting on and off) and the leftmost lane (high utilization from everyone trying to go fast). The middle two lanes are better because they have lower utilization and are positioned to absorb variation. Major metropolitan areas deal with the rightmost lane variation problem by putting stoplights at onramp bottoms, green every six seconds, normalizing the arrival rate so variation doesn’t ripple through traffic.

How does that apply to construction? You’ve got to look at any given crew and the operations they perform in a period of time. How much of that time do they need to be working? On the Pentagon remodel, those wedges were five-day wedges. For the most part, everybody needed four and a half days to do the work, except Selfland Industries when they first worked there. They had five and a half days of work. There’s no way to get building access late in the day or on Saturday to pick up that half day. Selfland had to reduce their cycle time through improvements and prefabrication. They learned how to purposefully always get it done in four and a half days. That buffer protected them from variation.

Why This Matters More Than Working Harder

When you violate production laws you don’t know exist, working harder makes things worse. More effort applied to broken systems amplifies dysfunction. Longer hours violating Little’s Law extend duration instead of shortening it. Better intentions while violating the law of variation compound problems instead of solving them. The production laws govern outcomes regardless of effort, intention, or experience.

Think about Little’s Law. Smaller batch sizes always produce faster throughput. If you’ve got a batch of ten, at any point in time you’re only working on one, nine are idle. Drop that to batches of five and only four are idle. Get it down to one and you never have anything idle. With the same number of people, it goes through faster. Yet superintendents routinely create massive batches thinking efficiency requires scale, violating Little’s Law constantly without knowing it exists.

Think about bottlenecks. They’re about capacity, not critical paths. On a Toyota Camry production line with ninety-second Takt time, there might be one hundred operations. No more than fifteen percent operate close to seventy-five seconds. Many are in the low sixties. One or two might be below sixty. Making improvements to operations below sixty doesn’t help flow. Making improvements to the dozen operating at seventy-two seconds improves the speed of the line. With Takt planning, you find your bottleneck, establish pace based on what the bottleneck activity can do, and everybody falls in line with higher capacity on their wagon than the limiting operation.

Think about variation stacking. People think variation offsets each other. It doesn’t, it stacks. Variation compounds with dependence. When you’ve got twenty or twenty-five or twenty-eight dependent operations, that 0.9 reliability rate becomes minuscule by the end. The painter at the end can never recover time lost early in the sequence because variation has compounded through every dependent handoff. Yet superintendents in the honeymoon phase lose time thinking it can be made up later. It can’t.

Think about Kingman’s formula. Cycle time multiplied by capacity utilization multiplied by variation effects equals overall duration. If electricians can do overhead in a three-thousand-square-foot area in five days at one hundred percent capacity with no variation, that’s your baseline. Add eighty percent utilization from overtime fatigue and you’re at six-point-two-five days. Add variation from coordination failures and you’re at eight or nine days. The five-day task became nine days because you violated production laws trying to go faster.

The Framework: Learning and Applying Production Laws

The goal isn’t memorizing formulas. It’s understanding fundamental principles that govern how work flows so you can make decisions that work with these laws instead of against them. Building systems that respect production laws instead of violating them through intuition.

Little’s Law says smaller batch sizes produce faster throughput. Limit work in process. Finish as you go. Prepare work ahead of time. Make work ready for people and people ready for work. The paradox that Nicholas Modig and Par Ahlstrom write about in This Is Lean gets resolved, there isn’t a tradeoff when work is ready for people and people are ready for work. You have both flow and high productivity. The problem is construction doesn’t take seriously the make-ready planning process used in Last Planner System.

The law of bottlenecks says identify and optimize capacity constraints systematically. Think about Takt wagons. You establish pace, say two days, for all work on given flow units. Inevitably, most people on those wagons can perform better than two days, but some are the limiting ones bottlenecking you. You’ve set the pace for the whole line based on the bottleneck activity. Everyone else has higher capacity on their wagon. You could add blocking to framer wagons that doesn’t interfere with other work. Or you provide standby capacity, when every fifth wagon has a three-bedroom-plus-den apartment needing another framer, you pull somebody off workable backlog for two days, then return them.

The law of variation says variation stacks and compounds with dependence. Variation in something as simple as window systems over long walls requires engineering to take up tolerances. If you’re plus-or-minus a half-inch and twenty elements are each plus-an-eighth, you now have a problem. Variation doesn’t offset, it stacks. With Takt, you take out variation of pace and frequency of performing. You now have drumbeat. That train has no variation, every two days that car is in a different spot. You’ve taken out variation so there’s no compounding even though dependence still exists.

Address overburden first, then variation, then waste. Overburden shows up as eighty-pound cement bags when OSHA limits are fifty pounds. As cranes loaded beyond capacity. As eleven decisions required every time someone installs parts five hundred times per shift, creating decision fatigue that produces errors. Toyota reduced decisions from eleven to five by kitting interior parts together, everything in the tote is sandal-colored, not mixed with gray. That’s twenty-five hundred fewer decisions per person per shift. Take care of overburden first so people have capacity to see and address variation.

Kingman’s formula: cycle time × capacity utilization × variation effects = overall duration. On the Pentagon, Selfland learned to always finish in four and a half days instead of five and a half because variation would push them over otherwise. They needed buffer within their cycle time to absorb variation. If you’re highly utilized, using almost all available time, and you have variation that causes you to go over, you ruin yourself. Know your utilization. Know your variation. Build buffer to absorb variation instead of planning to one hundred percent utilization with no margin.

The Practical Path Forward

Here’s how this works in practice. You’re making a decision on your project. Before executing it, ask: does this violate production laws?

Am I creating large batches when Little’s Law says smaller is faster? Am I pushing isolated schedule pieces instead of moving everything together to maintain rhythm? Am I ignoring bottlenecks by improving non-limiting operations? Am I increasing variation instead of reducing it? Am I pushing utilization to one hundred percent without buffer for variation? If any answer is yes, find a different approach.

Study the laws systematically. These aren’t basic concepts, they’re fundamental principles that reveal themselves deeper the more you investigate. Jason walked into that conversation having implemented production laws for three weeks. His life had already changed. But sitting with Hal and Felipe, he kept discovering new applications. The law of variation alone opened his eyes to where it shows up in cycle times, project management, instructions, and schedules, everywhere. Investigate thoroughly like Musashi taught.

Apply them in sequence: overburden, variation, waste. Don’t start with waste elimination like most Lean teaching suggests. That was Taiichi Ohno’s misdirection to maintain competitive advantage. Start with overburden, remove systemic pressure so people can breathe. Then address variation, create rhythm and stability. Then eliminate waste, now that you have capacity and stability to see where waste actually exists and how to remove it without breaking flow.

Build systems that respect these laws. Takt planning takes out variation of pace. Make-ready planning addresses Little’s Law by preparing work before starting it. Bottleneck analysis identifies where to focus improvement. Buffer built into cycle times absorbs variation. These aren’t separate systems, they’re integrated approaches respecting production laws instead of violating them.

Why This Protects Projects and People

We’re not just building projects. We’re protecting jobs, families, and futures from the dysfunction that violating production laws creates. And whether we learn and apply these laws or keep violating them through intuition determines whether we build sustainable success or chronic failure.

When you violate production laws, you’re not just hurting efficiency. You’re overburdening people, compounding variation that destroys their work, forcing them into unsustainable patterns. The electrician who had to guess and do rework because the architect didn’t share information wasn’t lazy or incompetent—the system reinforced behaviors where starting and billing was prioritized over having complete information. That’s a production law violation that harms people.

When you understand and apply production laws, you’re protecting everyone. Overburden gets removed so people can do their best work. Variation gets controlled so handoffs are predictable. Batch sizes get optimized so work flows instead of stalling. Capacity gets right-sized with buffer for variation instead of pushed to one hundred percent. People can succeed because systems respect fundamental laws instead of violating them.

Respect for people means building systems based on production laws instead of intuition. It means learning the principles that govern work so decisions work with reality instead of against it. It means stopping the amnesia where every generation rediscovers through pain what was documented a century ago.

The Challenge in Front of You

You can keep making intuitive decisions that violate production laws. You can keep trusting experience built on broken systems. You can keep working harder within approaches that fundamentally don’t work. You can wonder why reasonable decisions produce unreasonable results.

Or you can learn production laws. You can study Little’s Law, the law of bottlenecks, the law of variation, Kingman’s formula. You can understand why overburden first, then variation, then waste is the sequence that works. You can build systems respecting these laws instead of violating them. You can make decisions based on principles instead of guesses.

The projects that succeed consistently aren’t led by superintendents who work harder. They’re led by people who understand production laws. Who know these aren’t basic concepts but fundamental principles revealing themselves deeper the more you investigate. Who’ve learned that what seems reasonable often violates laws as real as gravity. Who’ve discovered that systematic understanding beats intuitive management every time.

These laws have been known since the 1920s. Toyota has built competitive advantage on them since the 1940s. Construction is just starting to rediscover them. You can be part of that rediscovery or keep violating laws you don’t know exist.

Investigate this thoroughly.

On we go.

 

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the five core production laws and why do they matter?

Little’s Law: smaller batch sizes produce faster throughput, limit work in process, finish as you go. Law of Bottlenecks: identify and optimize capacity constraints, not non-limiting operations. Law of Variation: variation stacks and compounds with dependence, it doesn’t offset. Kingman’s Formula: cycle time × capacity utilization × variation effects = overall duration. The overburden-variation-waste sequence: address overburden first so people have capacity to see variation, then eliminate waste to enable flow. These aren’t suggestions, they’re laws governing how work flows that you violate at your peril.

Why should I address overburden before variation and waste?

In construction there’s already massive systemic pressure on people trying to do their best. Deming said best efforts aren’t enough when the system operates against you. When you remove overburden from people, you create capacity to look at variation and understand how it’s wreaking havoc on your system. Then you can get better about removing waste to enable flow because now you have breathing room. Toyota taught waste-first to maintain competitive advantage, it was misdirection. The actual sequence that works is overburden, then variation, then waste.

How does variation compound with dependence in ways that destroy projects?

In a seven-step operation, if you’re reliable at 0.9 (ninety percent), 0.9 to the seventh power is a really small number. Early slow starts can’t be made up later because variation compounds through every dependent handoff. The painter at the end of a twenty-operation sequence can never recover time lost early. That’s why they bid assuming they won’t get to spray and back-roll, they price in the compounded variation they know is coming. Superintendents in the honeymoon phase lose time thinking it can be made up. It can’t. Variation stacks—it doesn’t offset.

What does Kingman’s formula mean practically for my project?

If a task takes five days at one hundred percent capacity with no variation, that’s baseline. Add eighty percent utilization from fatigue and it becomes six-point-two-five days. Add variation from coordination failures and you’re at eight or nine days. The five-day task became nine days because you violated production laws. Selfland on the Pentagon learned this—they needed four-and-a-half-day actual work in five-day Takt wagons because variation would push them over otherwise. If you’re highly utilized with high variation, you ruin yourself. You need buffer within cycle time to absorb variation.

How do I start learning and applying these laws on my projects?

Study them systematically—these reveal themselves deeper the more you investigate. Read This Is Lean by Modig and Ahlstrom. Study Toyota’s actual practices, not just their public teaching. Implement Takt planning to remove variation of pace. Use Last Planner System for make-ready planning that respects Little’s Law. Analyze bottlenecks to focus improvements where they matter. Build buffer into cycle times for variation absorption. Before any decision, ask: does this violate production laws? If yes, find a different approach that works with these laws instead of against them.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

Brooks’s Law, Feat. Felipe Engineer

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 36 min

The Brooks’s Law Problem: Why Adding More People and Overtime to Late Projects Makes Them Later

Your project is slipping. The critical path is extending. The owner is asking questions. So you do what every superintendent does when they’re behind. You add more people. You authorize overtime. You push harder. You tell yourself that more hands and more hours equal more speed. And then you watch the project duration extend instead of shrink. You’ve just violated Brooks’s Law. And now you’re paying the price.

Brooks’s Law comes from software development. Fred Brooks at IBM studied thousands of projects and found something that contradicted everything project managers believed. When projects were deemed behind schedule, adding more people or spending overtime didn’t make them finish earlier. The data was clear. More people late in the project increases duration. More overtime beyond two weeks kills productivity. The go-to project management reaction, throw resources at the problem, was exactly wrong. And construction follows the same pattern.

The projects that recover successfully aren’t led by superintendents who add more people. They’re led by people who understand that communication channels multiply exponentially as crew size increases. Who recognize that context switching destroys productivity every time someone gets interrupted. Who know that overtime beyond nine weeks drops capacity from one hundred percent to sixty percent or lower. Who’ve learned that the answer to being behind is stabilizing the project so you can optimize it, not throwing manpower and materials at problems hoping speed increases.

The Problem Every Superintendent Creates

Walk onto any project that’s behind schedule and you’ll find the same pattern. Leadership panicked. They added crews. They authorized overtime. They pushed harder. And the project got worse instead of better. More coordination problems. More communication breakdowns. More rework. More delays. The solution they implemented was the exact thing extending their duration. They violated Brooks’s Law thinking they were solving their problem.

Most superintendents don’t recognize they’re making it worse. They think adding people is practical. Authoritative. Decisive leadership responding to crisis. They frame throwing resources at problems as taking action instead of recognizing it as violation of production laws. They don’t see that more people means exponentially more communication channels, that more overtime means dramatically lower productivity, that the thing they’re doing to speed up is exactly what’s slowing down.

The pattern shows up everywhere in construction. The project falls behind, so leadership brings in another concrete crew, never analyzing how many communication channels that creates. The schedule slips, so they authorize sixty-hour weeks, never recognizing that sustained overtime drops productivity to sixty percent. The punch list grows, so they throw more people at it, never acknowledging that fixing defects after the fact takes four to twenty-five times longer than fixing them when noticed. The superintendent pushes harder instead of stabilizing smarter.

Think about what this creates. You’ve got ten people on your crew. That’s forty-five communication channels. Every time someone needs information, there are forty-five potential paths it could travel. Every time there’s a change, forty-five channels need updating. Every coordination meeting requires managing forty-five relationships. Now double the crew to twenty people. You don’t have ninety channels. You have one hundred ninety. The complexity doesn’t scale linearly. It explodes exponentially. And you wonder why coordination is breaking down.

Meanwhile, you’re authorizing overtime thinking more hours equals more production. Week one, maybe you see gains. Week two, productivity starts dropping. Week three, people are exhausted. By week nine, you’re operating at sixty percent capacity. That five-day task now takes eight-point-three days. Add in the variation created by tired crews making mistakes, communication breaking down, and coordination failing, and that five-day task is now taking ten days or more. You threw overtime at the problem and extended duration instead of shortening it.

The Failure Pattern Nobody Recognizes

This isn’t about never adding people or avoiding all overtime. This is about recognizing that Brooks’s Law governs how projects actually flow. That adding manpower late in a project increases duration. That sustained overtime kills productivity. That the complexity of communication grows exponentially, not linearly. That most “solutions” to being behind make the problem worse.

Construction culture sometimes treats adding resources as the only response to problems. The superintendent who sees red on the schedule and immediately authorizes more crews. The project manager who demands overtime when tasks slip. The leadership team that thinks throwing people and hours at problems demonstrates decisive action. These patterns look like strength, like taking control, like solving problems. And they’re dangerous because they violate production laws that can’t be broken without consequences.

So superintendents add crews thinking it increases capacity. They authorize overtime thinking it buys time. They push harder thinking effort equals results. They never recognize that communication channels are multiplying exponentially, that context switching is destroying productivity that overtime is killing capacity, that the thing they’re doing to recover is extending their duration. They don’t see that Brooks’s Law applies to construction just like it applies to software.

The story always goes the same way. Project falls behind. Leadership adds more people. Communication breaks down because now there are exponentially more channels. Coordination fails because nobody can track all the handoffs. Onboarding consumes existing crew productivity teaching new people the project. Context switching destroys focus as interruptions multiply. Overtime extends from two weeks to two months. Productivity drops from one hundred percent to sixty percent. The five-day task becomes ten days. The project duration extends. Leadership adds more people and more overtime thinking that’ll fix it. The problem compounds. And nobody connects the extended duration to their violation of Brooks’s Law.

Nobody teaches superintendents that communication channels follow the formula n times n-minus-one divided by two. That three people create three channels but ten people create forty-five channels and two hundred people create nineteen thousand nine hundred channels. That context switching costs twenty percent productivity every time someone gets interrupted. That multitasking temporarily decreases IQ. That sustained overtime beyond nine weeks kills capacity. That the answer to being behind isn’t throwing more resources at problems.

A Story From the Field About Communication Channels

Felipe Engineer was discussing Brooks’s Law with Jason. Someone had made a mean comment on LinkedIn, and Felipe, demonstrating the character he’s known for, called the person and spent two and a half hours on a Friday night mending bridges. That’s Felipe. Always building relationships instead of burning them. And that dedication to communication makes him the perfect person to explain why adding people destroys projects.

Here’s the math. Jason and Felipe talking creates one communication channel. Add one more person and you’ve got three people with three channels. Not a big jump. But add more people and watch what happens. Four people creates six channels. Five people creates ten channels. Eight people creates twenty-eight channels. Ten people creates forty-five channels. The formula is n times n-minus-one divided by two. And it grows exponentially, not linearly.

Think about a regular project site. Even a twenty-million-dollar job can easily have two hundred construction workers and management staff. That’s nineteen thousand nine hundred communication channels for just two hundred people on a single project. Every time information needs to move, there are nineteen thousand nine hundred potential paths. Every coordination meeting requires managing exponential complexity. Every change requires updating thousands of relationships. And superintendents wonder why communication breaks down when they add more crews.

The communication problem creates the context switching problem. You’re focused on a task. Operating at one hundred percent productivity. Then someone interrupts you. A text message. A question. A coordination issue. You stop. You address the interruption. Then you try to go back to your task. You lose twenty percent of your time just switching back. The longer the interruption, the worse it gets. Interrupt someone writing an email and watch how long it takes them to start typing again after you finish talking. The delay is real. The productivity loss is measurable.

The more you multitask, the slower you get. And multitasking temporarily decreases your IQ. Yet construction runs on interruptions. The foreman coordinating five trades. The superintendent managing ten foremen. The project manager juggling twenty issues simultaneously. Everyone’s multitasking. Everyone’s context switching. Everyone’s operating at reduced capacity. And then leadership wonders why adding more people makes things worse instead of better.

Here’s another pattern Brooks’s Law predicts. The end of projects is when duration extends most dramatically. Construction typically adds manpower at the end trying to finish. All that does is extend overall project duration. Look at the gap between substantial completion and the last worker leaving the site. It’s huge. Because crews are doing shoddy work just to get signed off, then having to come back and fix it properly. Rework takes four to twenty-five times longer than fixing defects when noticed. That punch list item that would have taken fifteen minutes to fix during construction now requires remobilization, coordination, and hours of work.

The answer isn’t adding more people to do more rework faster. The answer is Takt planning with smaller batch sizes, limiting work in process, finishing as you go, and quality at the source. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development to stabilize systems instead of throwing resources at problems, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

Why This Matters More Than Looking Busy

When you add people and overtime to late projects, you’re not recovering. You’re extending duration. Brooks’s Law isn’t a suggestion. It’s a production law that governs how projects actually flow. You can’t violate it and expect success any more than you can violate gravity and expect to fly.

Kingman’s formula proves Brooks’s Law mathematically. The cycle time of any process multiplied by capacity utilization multiplied by the effects of variation equals overall duration. Take electricians doing overhead in a three-thousand-square-foot area in five days. That’s only if they’re at one hundred percent capacity with no variation. Add overtime and capacity drops to sixty percent. Now that five-day task takes eight-point-three days. Add in variation from communication breakdowns, context switching, coordination failures, and exhausted crews making mistakes, and you’ve probably gone from eight-point-three to ten days or more. You threw overtime at a five-day task and turned it into a ten-day task.

Communication channels multiply the problem. You started with a crew that had established rhythms and clear handoffs. You added people thinking more hands equal more speed. But now coordination requires managing exponentially more communication channels. Information that flowed smoothly through established relationships now gets lost in the complexity. Handoffs that were clear become confused. The productivity you had drops as everyone spends time coordinating instead of producing.

Context switching destroys what’s left. Your existing crew was focused. Operating efficiently. Then you brought in new people who need onboarding. Teaching them the project pulls your productive crew away from work to transfer knowledge. Every interruption costs twenty percent productivity. Every context switch compounds the loss. The capacity you thought you were adding actually consumed the capacity you had.

Watch for These Signals Brooks’s Law Is Destroying Your Project

Your project is vulnerable when you see these patterns:

  • Leadership response to being behind is immediately adding crews without analyzing communication channel multiplication
  • Overtime extending beyond two weeks with no end date, showing that temporary measures have become permanent dysfunction
  • Punch lists growing exponentially as crews do shoddy work just to get signed off then have to remobilize to fix it properly
  • Coordination meetings consuming more time than production as exponentially multiplying communication channels overwhelm the team

The Framework: Stabilize Then Optimize Instead of Throwing Resources

The goal isn’t avoiding all overtime or never adding people. It’s understanding Brooks’s Law so you know when adding resources helps versus when it hurts. Recognizing that adding manpower late in projects extends duration. Building systems that don’t require heroic effort and violation of production laws to succeed.

Short-term overtime can create gains if kept under two weeks. Beyond that, productivity drops dramatically. By nine weeks, you’re operating at sixty percent capacity or lower. The task that should take five days now takes eight-point-three days or more when you factor in variation. The overtime you’re paying for is extending duration instead of shortening it. If you need overtime beyond two weeks, your problem isn’t hours—it’s systems.

Communication channels grow exponentially with crew size. Three people create three channels. Ten people create forty-five channels. Two hundred people create nineteen thousand nine hundred channels. Every time you add people, you’re not just adding hands, you’re adding exponential coordination complexity. Sometimes that’s necessary. But recognize the cost. Build systems to manage it. Don’t assume that doubling crew size doubles productivity. It doesn’t. It multiplies communication complexity and often reduces productivity.

Context switching costs twenty percent productivity every interruption. Multitasking decreases IQ temporarily. Focus enables flow. Interruptions destroy it. When you add people to late projects, you’re adding interruptions. Onboarding requires pulling productive people away from work. Coordination requires constant communication. The capacity you thought you were adding gets consumed by context switching before it produces anything.

Quality at the source prevents rework multiplication. Fixing defects when noticed takes minutes. Fixing them on punch lists takes four to twenty-five times longer because now you need remobilization, coordination, and reinstallation. Finish as you go. Do it right the first time. Build quality in instead of inspecting it in later. The time saved on rework exceeds any gains from rushing through shoddy work.

Stabilize before you optimize. When your project is behind, the answer isn’t throwing more people and more hours at it. The answer is stabilizing the systems so you can optimize flow. Smaller batch sizes. Limited work in process. Finishing as you go. Takt planning to create rhythm. Once systems are stable, then you can optimize. But optimization on unstable systems just creates more chaos.

The Practical Path Forward

Here’s how this works in practice. Your project is behind. You’re tempted to add crews and authorize overtime. You need to decide whether that helps or hurts.

First question: how long will the overtime last? If less than two weeks and you have a specific recovery plan, maybe it helps. If indefinite or longer than two weeks, you’re killing productivity instead of increasing it. By nine weeks you’ll be operating at sixty percent capacity. Find a different solution.

Second question: how many communication channels are you creating? Use the formula. Current crew size times current crew size minus one divided by two. That’s your current channels. Now calculate what happens when you add people. If you’re going from ten people (forty-five channels) to twenty people (one hundred ninety channels), you’re not doubling capacity, you’re quadrupling complexity. Build coordination systems before adding people or accept that productivity will drop.

Third question: what’s driving the problem? If you’re behind because systems are broken, adding people makes it worse. Stabilize first. Fix the workflow. Establish rhythm. Then optimize. Throwing resources at systemic problems just multiplies the dysfunction across more people.

Execute based on production laws instead of panic. Brooks’s Law says adding people to late projects makes them later. Kingman’s formula says capacity utilization and variation determine duration. Context switching costs twenty percent productivity per interruption. These aren’t suggestions. They’re laws. Build your recovery strategy around them or watch your recovery fail.

Why This Protects Projects and People

We’re not just building projects. We’re protecting jobs, families, and futures from the burnout that Brooks’s Law violations create. And whether we stabilize systems or throw resources at problems determines whether we build sustainable success or temporary chaos.

When you add overtime beyond two weeks, you’re not protecting jobs. You’re burning people out. Productivity drops to sixty percent. Quality suffers. Mistakes multiply. People go home exhausted instead of fulfilled. Their families suffer because they’re working sixty-hour weeks producing less than they would in forty hours with stable systems. The overtime you’re requiring is destroying the people you’re claiming to protect.

When you add people to late projects without managing communication complexity, you’re not increasing capacity. You’re creating chaos. Coordination breaks down. Information gets lost. Handoffs fail. Everyone spends more time in meetings trying to coordinate than actually producing. The people you added to help are consuming the productivity of the people you had.

Respect for people means building systems that don’t require heroic effort to succeed. It means recognizing that Brooks’s Law applies to construction just like it applies to software. It means stabilizing before optimizing instead of throwing resources at problems. It means protecting people from the burnout that sustained overtime creates and the chaos that exponential communication channels produce.

The Challenge in Front of You

You can keep violating Brooks’s Law. You can keep adding people to late projects thinking more hands equal more speed. You can keep authorizing overtime beyond two weeks thinking more hours equal more productivity. You can keep pushing harder instead of stabilizing smarter. You can watch your duration extend and wonder why the solution isn’t working.

Or you can follow production laws. You can recognize that communication channels grow exponentially. You can understand that context switching costs twenty percent productivity. You can acknowledge that sustained overtime kills capacity. You can stabilize systems before throwing resources at them. You can build recovery strategies that work with Brooks’s Law instead of against it.

The projects that recover successfully aren’t led by superintendents who add more people. They’re led by people who understand production laws. Who recognize that the answer to being behind is stabilizing systems, not throwing resources. Who know that Brooks’s Law applies to construction just like every other domain. Who’ve learned that fret not if you’re getting behind, there are absolutely things you can do, and the answer is not just throw more people at it.

Your project is behind. You’re tempted to add crews and authorize overtime. Before you do, calculate the communication channels. Check how long the overtime will last. Analyze what’s driving the problem. Follow Brooks’s Law instead of violating it.

Stabilize. Then optimize.

On we go.

 

Frequently Asked Questions

What exactly is Brooks’s Law and why does it matter for construction?

Brooks’s Law states that adding people to late projects makes them later. It comes from Fred Brooks studying thousands of IBM software projects and finding that the go-to response, throw more people and overtime at problems—actually extended duration instead of shortening it. Construction follows the same pattern. Communication channels grow exponentially as crew size increases. Context switching destroys productivity. Sustained overtime kills capacity. The formula for communication channels is n times n-minus-one divided by two, meaning ten people create forty-five channels but twenty people create one hundred ninety channels. You’re not doubling capacity when you double crew size, you’re quadrupling coordination complexity.

How long can I run overtime before productivity drops significantly?

Short-term overtime under two weeks can create gains. Beyond that, productivity drops dramatically. The absolute maximum before exponential decline is nine weeks, and by that point you’re operating at sixty percent capacity or lower. A five-day task now takes eight-point-three days when you factor in reduced capacity, and closer to ten days when you add variation from exhausted crews making mistakes. The overtime you’re paying for is extending duration instead of shortening it. If you need overtime beyond two weeks, your problem isn’t hours, it’s systems that need stabilizing.

Why does context switching cost so much productivity?

When you’re focused on a task at one hundred percent productivity and get interrupted, you lose twenty percent of your time just switching back to the task. Your brain has to rebuild the context it had before the interruption. The longer the interruption and the more complex the mental work, the worse the loss. Interrupt someone writing an email and watch the delay before they start typing again, that’s context switching cost made visible. Multitasking makes it worse and temporarily decreases IQ. Construction runs on interruptions, which means everyone’s operating at reduced capacity all the time. Adding more people multiplies interruptions and compounds the productivity loss.

What should I do instead of adding people when my project falls behind?

Stabilize before you optimize. Identify what’s driving the problem, is it broken workflows, poor coordination, quality issues, or systemic dysfunction? Fix the systems first. Implement Takt planning to create rhythm. Use smaller batch sizes and limit work in process. Finish as you go with quality at the source. Once systems are stable, then you can optimize flow. Throwing people at unstable systems just multiplies the dysfunction across more crew members. The answer to being behind is building systems that don’t require heroic effort to succeed, not authorizing overtime and adding crews hoping harder work produces better results.

How do I manage communication channels when I do need to add people?

Calculate what you’re creating first using n times n-minus-one divided by two. If you’re going from ten people (forty-five channels) to twenty people (one hundred ninety channels), build coordination systems before adding people or accept that productivity will drop. Use scrum team structures to break large groups into smaller coordinated units. Establish clear communication protocols. Create standard work for handoffs. Limit who needs to coordinate with whom. Recognize that you’re not just adding hands, you’re adding exponential complexity. Plan for it instead of hoping it won’t matter.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

And then a Miracle Happens!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 42 min

The Miracle Problem: Why “And Then a Miracle Happens” Is Not a Recovery Strategy

Your project hit variation. The deck pour ran into problems. The vertical concrete is behind. Materials didn’t show. Weather shut you down for three days. Now you’re staring at a schedule that doesn’t work anymore and everyone’s asking what the plan is. So you do what most superintendents do. You dissolve some logic in Primavera. You shift a few activities. You tell yourself it’ll work out. You’re banking on a miracle.

Here’s the cartoon that Keith Cunningham loved so much he bought it. Two people standing at a chalkboard. Math on the left side. An equal sign. More math on the right side showing the desired result. And in the middle, written on the board: “And then a miracle happens.” The professor reviewing the work says, “I think we need some more detail around step two.” That’s most construction schedule recovery. We do some things. Then we hope for the best. Then we expect success. We’re missing step two—the actual plan that follows production laws.

The projects that recover from variation aren’t led by superintendents who hope harder. They’re led by people who recognize the impact immediately, analyze it honestly, make a plan that follows production laws, and execute that plan without wishful thinking. Who understand that throwing manpower and materials at problems increases project duration instead of decreasing it. Who know that dissolving logic to make the schedule look better is the same as writing “and then a miracle happens” on your recovery plan. Who’ve learned that anything increasing variation will increase your project duration—and most “solutions” increase variation.

The Problem Every Superintendent Creates

Walk onto any troubled project and you’ll find the same pattern. Something went wrong. The schedule broke. And instead of following production laws to recover, leadership is hoping for miracles. They’re throwing more manpower at the problem thinking speed will increase. They’re shifting isolated pieces of the schedule thinking localized adjustments won’t ripple. They’re dissolving logic in the scheduling software thinking fake plans will somehow produce real results. They’re doing the construction equivalent of writing math on the left, “and then a miracle happens” in the middle, and the completion date they want on the right.

Most superintendents don’t recognize they’re hoping for miracles. They think they’re making practical decisions. Realistic adjustments to handle variation. Strategic responses to field conditions. They frame wishful thinking as planning instead of recognizing it as the avoidance of actual analysis. They don’t see that their “recovery strategy” violates every production law that governs how work actually flows.

The pattern shows up everywhere in construction. The concrete schedule hits variation on decks, so leadership shifts just the deck schedule out while leaving walls and columns where they were, never analyzing whether that creates more problems than it solves. The project falls behind, so they throw more crews at it, never recognizing that Brooks’s Law says adding manpower late in a project increases duration instead of decreasing it. The superintendent sees the critical path extended, so they dissolve some logic to make it look better, never acknowledging they just replaced a realistic plan with a fantasy. The team hopes harder instead of planning better.

Think about what this creates. Your concrete crew is running a rhythm. Columns on day one. Walls on day two. Decks on days three, four, and five. Hook time from the tower crane is scheduled. Procurement is sequenced. Handoffs are consistent. Then the deck schedule hits variation. Someone suggests shifting just the decks out a few days. Sounds reasonable. Isolated problem, isolated solution. Except now you’ve broken the rhythm. Different crane schedules. Different procurement times. Different manpower cycles. Different handoffs. You’ve increased variation trying to fix variation. And increased variation increases project duration.

Meanwhile, you’re congratulating yourself for “fixing” the schedule. You adjusted for the problem. You accommodated the reality. You updated the plan. Except you didn’t. You dissolved logic. You created inconsistent handoffs. You violated production laws. You wrote “and then a miracle happens” in the middle of your recovery strategy and called it planning.

The Failure Pattern Nobody Recognizes

This isn’t about never adjusting schedules or ignoring field realities. This is about recognizing that most “solutions” to variation actually increase variation instead of decreasing it. That throwing manpower and materials at problems extends duration instead of shortening it. That hope is not a strategy and dissolving logic is not planning.

Construction culture sometimes treats urgency as a substitute for analysis. The superintendent who makes fast decisions without checking production laws. The scheduler who dissolves logic to hit the date leadership wants to see. The project team that throws more resources at problems without analyzing whether that helps or hurts. These patterns can look like action, like pragmatism, like getting things done. And they’re dangerous because they replace systematic thinking with wishful thinking, production laws with hope, and actual plans with miracles.

So superintendents shift isolated pieces of schedules thinking it won’t create ripples. They add crews thinking more people equals more speed. They work overtime thinking hours equal productivity. They never recognize that these “solutions” violate production laws that govern how work actually flows. They don’t see that their recovery strategies are built on miracles, not math.

The story always goes the same way. Project hits variation. Leadership makes quick decision without analyzing production laws. Schedule gets “fixed” by dissolving logic or shifting isolated activities. Everyone feels better because the schedule looks better. Except the schedule isn’t realistic anymore. It’s fantasy. The fake plan fails. More variation occurs. More miracle-based solutions get applied. The dysfunction compounds. The project fails. And leadership never connects the failure to their refusal to follow production laws.

Nobody teaches superintendents that Kingman’s formula, Little’s Law, the law of bottlenecks, the law of variation, and Brooks’s Law actually govern how projects flow. That you can’t violate these laws and expect success any more than you can violate gravity and expect to fly. That when variation occurs, the right response is systematic analysis followed by a plan that respects production laws, not quick fixes that hope for miracles.

A Story From the Field About Following Production Laws

Felipe Engineer and Jason were at the St. Louis community of practice doing a four-and-a-half-hour introduction to the Last Planner System. Somebody asked: “When you’re talking about Takt planning and Last Planner, what happens when variation occurs?” Felipe nailed it. When variation occurs, when something happens, you immediately show the reality of what happens. Then you plan. You make a plan that makes sense that follows production laws that will ensure you either can hit the end date or you know what the situation is so you can be realistic and go get help.

You always want to widen your circle. You always want to get help. But you always want to tell the truth. Do not lie. Do not withhold the truth. Do not avoid showing an impact in a schedule. Do not avoid putting the impact in there. You have to show it. You’re not legally allowed to not show the impact. Once the impact is shown, then you make a plan. You can’t just dissolve logic in Primavera or Asta or Microsoft Project. You can’t fake a plan. That’s the same as saying one plus two plus and then a miracle happens equals the result you want. Wishful thinking never gets anybody anywhere.

Here’s a concrete example. Weston Woolsie at Okland taught Jason about smaller batch sizes and smaller crew sizes for concrete. Everything in a concrete plan should be Takt’d out. Everything. One hundred percent. Columns, walls, decks—all on consistent rhythms with consistent handoffs. Now somebody asks: what do you do when variation happens? What if variation just happens with the deck or just with the walls?

The instinct is to shift just that piece. Deck schedule hits problems, shift the deck schedule. Leave everything else alone. Sounds reasonable. But let’s test it against production laws. Does shifting just the deck schedule help with Kingman’s formula? Kingman’s formula says cycle time multiplied by capacity utilization multiplied by effective variation tells you overall process time. To improve that, you need consistent cycle times in a rhythm, reduced variation, and operation at one hundred percent capacity. Shifting just the deck schedule breaks the rhythm, increases variation, and disrupts capacity. So no, it doesn’t help with Kingman’s formula.

Does it help with the law of bottlenecks? If your decks had variation and you’re considering moving just the deck schedule out while leaving walls and columns isolated, does that help you see and optimize bottlenecks? No. You’ve increased variation, which violates another law and brings in so much inconsistent data that you cannot isolate and optimize bottlenecks.

Does it help with the law of variation? If you changed the sequence and interrelatedness between walls, columns, and decks and didn’t move them together, does that increase or decrease variation? It increases variation. Now you have different handoffs. Different crane schedules. Different procurement times. Different manpower cycles. Different everything. If you ever see concrete crews where they’re moving people from decks to walls to columns, shuffling everyone everywhere, you’re losing massive time because of context switching. You’re never going to make production.

Does it help with Little’s Law? Little’s Law says rightsize batch sizes, finish as you go, limit work in process. From that standpoint, you probably need to finish everything together as you go. Shifting just one piece doesn’t align with Little’s Law.

Does it help with Brooks’s Law? Brooks’s Law says when you put more manpower on a task, especially in later parts of that task or project duration, it increases throughput time and project duration. If you have a problem with decks and don’t move columns and walls with it, you’re likely going to shift manpower from one area to another and increase crew counts, which actually slows down your production rhythm. The adjustment doesn’t fit with Brooks’s Law either.

The lesson from the Germans Yanosh and Marco: sometimes in Takt’d systems, if you have variation in the system, it might be better to move everything together in that variation and keep it consistently together. Keep the workflow rhythm, the trade flow rhythm, and the logistical rhythm together instead of creating little ripples of variation which also create inconsistency in handoffs. When you have a problem on your schedule, when variation shows up, don’t freak out and make random decisions. Don’t wish for a miracle. Sit back and analyze the schedule and the impact, be realistic with it, and shift everything in a commonsensical manner according to production laws.

Why This Matters More Than Looking Busy

When you respond to variation by hoping for miracles instead of following production laws, you’re not recovering your project. You’re extending its duration. Every decision that increases variation increases project duration. Every violation of production laws costs time. Every fake plan built on dissolved logic creates more problems than it solves.

Think about the five production laws that govern how projects actually flow. Little’s Law says limit work in process, rightsize batch sizes, adjust procurement to meet dates on a rhythm, do quality work as you go, and finish as you go. The law of bottlenecks says identify and optimize constraints systematically. The law of variation says reduce variation to improve flow. Kingman’s formula says improve cycle times on a rhythm with consistent capacity and reduced variation. Brooks’s Law says adding manpower and materials late in a project increases duration instead of decreasing it.

These aren’t suggestions. They’re not guidelines. They’re laws. You can’t violate them and expect success. When your project hits variation and you respond by throwing more crews at it, you’re violating Brooks’s Law. When you shift isolated pieces of the schedule instead of moving everything together to maintain rhythm, you’re violating the law of variation and Kingman’s formula. When you dissolve logic to make dates look achievable, you’re abandoning Little’s Law and the law of bottlenecks. You’re replacing production laws with hope. Math with miracles.

The cartoon Keith Cunningham bought captures this perfectly. Math on the left. “And then a miracle happens” in the middle. Results on the right. The professor says, “I think we need some more detail around step two.” When you dissolve logic in your schedule, you’ve eliminated step two. When you throw manpower at problems without analyzing Brooks’s Law, you’ve replaced step two with hope. When you shift isolated activities without checking whether that increases variation, you’re banking on miracles instead of following production laws.

If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development to build teams that follow production laws instead of hoping for miracles, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

Watch for These Signals You’re Hoping for Miracles

Your project is vulnerable to miracle-based planning when you see these patterns:

  • Schedule “fixes” that dissolve logic or shift isolated activities without analyzing production laws, revealing that planning has been replaced with wishful thinking
  • Responses to variation that throw more manpower and materials at problems without checking Brooks’s Law, showing that hope is being substituted for systematic analysis
  • Recovery strategies that break rhythms and increase variation while claiming to fix problems, indicating that solutions are creating more dysfunction than they’re solving

The Framework: Following Production Laws When Variation Occurs

The goal isn’t avoiding all variation or pretending problems don’t exist. It’s responding to variation systematically instead of hopefully. Following production laws instead of banking on miracles. Making actual plans instead of fake ones.

Show the reality immediately when variation occurs. Do not lie. Do not withhold truth. Do not avoid showing impact in the schedule. You’re not legally allowed to hide it. You have to show what actually happened. Once the impact is shown, then you make a plan. Not a fake plan. Not dissolved logic. Not wishful thinking. An actual plan that follows production laws and respects how work actually flows.

Test every response against production laws before implementing it. Does this help or hurt Kingman’s formula? Does it increase or decrease variation? Does it improve or disrupt bottleneck optimization? Does it align with Little’s Law? Does it violate Brooks’s Law? If your “solution” violates production laws, it’s not a solution. It’s a miracle dressed up as planning. Find a different approach that actually works with how production flows.

Move schedules together to maintain rhythm instead of shifting isolated pieces. When concrete decks hit variation, don’t just shift the deck schedule. Shift columns, walls, and decks together. Keep the rhythm consistent. Maintain the handoffs. Preserve the crane schedule. Protect the procurement sequence. Keep crew cycles stable. It’s better to call that day a buffer day or lost day altogether and keep all relationships between phases consistent in rhythm than to create ripples of variation throughout the system by adjusting pieces in isolation.

Widen your circle and get help when needed. When variation occurs, you want to show the reality, make a plan that follows production laws, and determine whether you can hit the end date or whether you need help. If you need help, reach out. Bring in people who understand production laws. Get support from leadership. Expand your resources. But do it systematically, following Brooks’s Law, not randomly hoping more people equals more speed.

Don’t freak out when problems occur. Calm down. There are ways to get help. There are people who can help. And there are production laws that govern how to recover successfully. Follow them. When impact happens, you have to at least have one thing: a plan. Not hope. Not miracles. A plan. Patton said a good plan violently executed today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow. But Patton didn’t say no plan today violently executed. He said a good plan instead of a perfect plan. Everything you do has to have a plan that follows production laws.

The Practical Path Forward

Here’s how this works in practice. Your project hits variation. The deck schedule breaks. Someone suggests shifting just the decks out a few days. You need to decide whether that’s a plan or a miracle.

First question: does this follow production laws? Test it against Kingman’s formula, the law of bottlenecks, and the law of variation, Little’s Law, and Brooks’s Law. If it violates any of them, it’s not a plan. It’s wishful thinking. Find an approach that works with production laws instead of against them.

Second question: does this maintain rhythm or break it? If your concrete crew is running columns-walls-decks in consistent sequence with consistent handoffs and your “fix” disrupts that rhythm, you’re increasing variation. And anything that increases variation increases project duration. Shift everything together to maintain rhythm instead of breaking it with isolated adjustments.

Third question: are you showing reality or hiding it? If your recovery strategy involves dissolving logic to make dates look achievable, you’re lying. You’re not legally allowed to hide impact. Show what actually happened. Then make a plan based on reality instead of fantasy. The truth might be uncomfortable, but it’s the only foundation for actual recovery.

Make decisions based on production laws instead of hope. When someone suggests throwing more crews at the problem, check Brooks’s Law. When someone wants to shift isolated pieces of the schedule, check the law of variation. When someone proposes a solution, test it systematically before implementing it. If it doesn’t follow production laws, it won’t work. Find something that does.

Execute the plan without wishful thinking. Once you’ve made a plan that follows production laws, execute it. Don’t hedge. Don’t hope for miracles to fix the parts that are hard. Don’t assume things will work out. Follow the plan systematically. Adjust based on production laws when new variation occurs. Keep analyzing. Keep planning. Keep executing based on math instead of miracles.

Why This Protects Projects and People

We’re not just building projects. We’re protecting jobs, families, and futures from the dysfunction that miracle-based planning creates. And whether we follow production laws or hope for miracles when variation occurs determines whether we recover successfully or compound failure.

When you respond to variation with miracle-based planning, you’re not protecting the project. You’re threatening it. Fake plans fail. Dissolved logic doesn’t produce real results. Hope without production laws extends duration instead of shortening it. The project that looked “fixed” on the schedule is actually worse because now you’re operating from fantasy instead of reality.

When you follow production laws, you’re protecting everyone. The schedule reflects reality. The plan actually works. Recovery is possible because it’s based on how work actually flows instead of how you wish it would flow. Jobs become more secure because projects succeed when planning follows production laws instead of banking on miracles.

This protects families by creating realistic schedules that people can execute. When your recovery strategy is “work harder and hope for miracles,” people burn out trying to accomplish impossible things. When you follow production laws and make realistic plans, work becomes sustainable. People can execute successfully. They can go home at reasonable hours because they’re following plans that actually work instead of chasing miracles that never arrive.

Respect for people means making plans they can actually execute instead of asking them to produce miracles. It means following production laws so rhythm stays consistent and handoffs stay predictable. It means showing reality so people know what they’re actually dealing with instead of hiding behind fake schedules. It means building cultures where planning is systematic instead of hopeful, where recovery follows laws instead of wishes.

The Challenge in Front of You

You can keep hoping for miracles. You can keep dissolving logic when schedules break. You can keep throwing manpower and materials at problems without analyzing Brooks’s Law. You can keep shifting isolated pieces without checking whether that increases variation. You can keep writing “and then a miracle happens” in the middle of your recovery strategies.

Or you can follow production laws. You can show reality immediately when variation occurs. You can test every response against Kingman’s formula, the law of bottlenecks, and the law of variation, Little’s Law, and Brooks’s Law. You can move schedules together to maintain rhythm instead of breaking it. You can make actual plans instead of fake ones. You can replace hope with systematic analysis.

The projects that recover from variation aren’t led by superintendents who hope harder. They’re led by people who follow production laws. Who recognize that anything increasing variation increases project duration. Who understand that throwing manpower and materials at problems extends duration instead of shortening it. Who know that dissolved logic is the same as writing “and then a miracle happens” on the schedule. Who’ve learned that production laws govern how work actually flows and can’t be violated with wishful thinking.

Your schedule just broke. Variation occurred. Someone’s suggesting a quick fix that sounds reasonable. Before you implement it, test it against production laws. Does it follow Kingman’s formula? Does it reduce variation or increase it? Does it maintain rhythm or break it? Does it violate Brooks’s Law? Does it align with Little’s Law?

If it doesn’t follow production laws, it’s not a plan. It’s a miracle. And as Miyamoto Musashi said: investigate this thoroughly. Make sure you’re making decisions according to production law and actual math and actual science. Stop throwing manpower, materials, and information at problems and hoping they go away.

Anything that increases variation will increase your project duration.

On we go.

 

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I know if my recovery strategy is a plan or a miracle?

Test it against production laws. Does it follow Kingman’s formula by maintaining consistent cycle times in rhythm with reduced variation? Does it help identify and optimize bottlenecks? Does it reduce variation instead of increasing it? Does it align with Little’s Law by rightsizing batch sizes and limiting work in process? Does it avoid violating Brooks’s Law by not throwing manpower at problems late in the project? If your strategy violates any of these laws, it’s not a plan, it’s wishful thinking. Real plans work with production laws, not against them.

When deck schedules hit variation, why is it better to shift everything together instead of just the decks?

Because shifting just the decks breaks rhythm and increases variation. Your concrete crew is running a sequence: columns on day one, walls on day two, decks on days three through five. Hook time is scheduled. Procurement is sequenced. Handoffs are consistent. When you shift just decks, you create different crane schedules, different procurement times, different manpower cycles, different handoffs. You’ve increased variation trying to fix variation. Shifting everything together maintains the rhythm, keeps handoffs consistent, preserves the sequence, and follows the law of variation instead of violating it.

What should I do immediately when variation occurs on my project?

Show the reality. Do not lie. Do not withhold truth. Do not avoid showing the impact in your schedule. You’re not legally allowed to hide it. Once you’ve shown what actually happened, make a plan that follows production laws. Test your response against Kingman’s formula, the law of bottlenecks, the law of variation, Little’s Law, and Brooks’s Law. If it violates any of them, find a different approach. Widen your circle and get help if needed. But always start by showing reality and making actual plans instead of fake ones.

Why doesn’t throwing more manpower at problems speed up recovery?

Brooks’s Law. When you add manpower to a task, especially in later parts of that task or project, it increases throughput time instead of decreasing it. More people means more coordination. More communication. More context switching. More training. The productivity loss from adding people typically exceeds the capacity gain. That’s why projects that respond to variation by throwing more crews at problems usually see duration extend instead of shorten. Recovery requires following production laws, not violating them.

How do I convince leadership that we need realistic schedules instead of hopeful ones?

Show them the cartoon: math on the left, “and then a miracle happens” in the middle, results on the right. Ask which recovery strategies follow production laws versus which ones hope for miracles. Demonstrate that dissolved logic fails when executed. Explain that anything increasing variation increases project duration. Help them understand that realistic plans based on production laws actually recover projects while hopeful plans based on miracles compound failure. The truth might be uncomfortable initially, but it’s the only foundation for actual success.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

Accountability will NOT Leave You Shorthanded!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 45 min

The Hostage Problem: Why Keeping Underperformers Because You’re Afraid of Being Short-Handed Guarantees You’ll Stay Short-Handed

You’ve got a foreman who’s not performing. He’s creating problems, undermining standards, bringing down team morale. Everyone knows he needs to go. But you’re keeping him because you’re terrified of being short-handed. You tell yourself you can’t afford to lose anyone right now. The project is too busy. The schedule is too tight. You’ll deal with it later. You’ll address it after this phase. You’ll have the hard conversation once things settle down.

So the underperformer stays. And the message goes out to your entire team: excellence is optional. Standards are negotiable. Performance doesn’t really matter because we’re too afraid of being short-handed to hold anyone accountable. Your best people see it. They’re carrying the load while the underperformer coasts. They’re meeting standards while he ignores them. They’re building the culture you say you want while he tears it down. And you’re letting it happen because you’re afraid.

Here’s what most superintendents miss. Keeping underperformers because you’re afraid of being short-handed is exactly what keeps you short-handed. Not temporarily, permanently. Because your best people leave environments where excellence isn’t required. Because your culture attracts people who want to coast instead of people who want to build. Because you’re spending leadership energy managing underperformance instead of developing capability. You think you’re protecting capacity by keeping everyone. Actually, you’re destroying it.

The projects with the strongest teams aren’t led by superintendents who never face people decisions. They’re led by people who understand that holding accountability won’t leave you short-handed if you’re recruiting, hiring, and training. Who recognize that you’re being held hostage by people who aren’t bought in. Who know that getting the right people in the right seats matters more than just filling seats. Who understand that sometimes you lose ten to fifty percent of your people when you establish real standards—and that’s exactly what needs to happen.

The Problem Every Superintendent Creates

Walk onto any struggling project and you’ll find the same pattern. There’s a foreman who everyone knows isn’t performing. A PM who’s not leading. A superintendent who’s creating more problems than he’s solving. A trade partner who won’t elevate to project standards. Everyone on the team knows these people need to go. But leadership keeps them because they’re terrified of being short-handed.

So underperformers stay in key seats. Projects limp along. Standards erode because enforcing them would require replacing people who won’t meet them. Excellence becomes impossible because you can’t build it with people who aren’t bought in. And the entire organization gets held hostage by the fear of losing capacity that isn’t really producing anything except problems.

Most superintendents don’t recognize they’re being held hostage. They think they’re being practical. Realistic about capacity constraints. Strategic about managing resources. They frame keeping underperformers as necessary compromise instead of recognizing it as the failure to make hard decisions that would actually build capability. They don’t see that their fear of being short-handed is the exact thing preventing them from building the team that wouldn’t be short-handed.

The pattern shows up everywhere in construction. The company running lean on superintendents, afraid to let anyone go, so they keep underperformers who destroy more value than they create. The project tolerating a cancerous foreman because finding a replacement feels impossible. The leadership team keeping a non-performing PM because they’re too busy to deal with the transition. The organization held hostage by people who aren’t bought in because leadership is too afraid of temporary disruption to create permanent improvement.

Think about what this creates. Your best foreman is executing at high standards. Your underperforming foreman is ignoring them. You’re tolerating both because you’re afraid of being short-handed. What message does that send? That performance doesn’t matter. That standards are optional. That excellence and mediocrity get treated the same. Your best people see it. They’re carrying extra load to compensate for underperformers you won’t address. How long do you think they’ll stay in that environment?

Meanwhile, you’re spending massive leadership energy managing the underperformer. Fixing their mistakes. Smoothing over conflicts they create. Working around their limitations. Compensating for their lack of capability. That energy should be developing your best people, building systems, creating flow. Instead it’s consumed by someone who shouldn’t be in that seat, who you’re keeping because you’re afraid of being short-handed for the weeks it would take to replace them.

The Failure Pattern Nobody Recognizes

This isn’t about being unreasonably harsh or eliminating everyone who makes mistakes. This is about recognizing that keeping underperformers because you’re afraid of being short-handed is exactly what keeps you short-handed permanently. That accountability without consequences teaches people consequences don’t exist. That your culture is defined by the worst behavior you tolerate, not the best behavior you celebrate.

Construction culture sometimes confuses loyalty with enabling. The superintendent who keeps people too long. The company that won’t make hard people decisions. The project that tolerates underperformance because “that’s just how he is.” These patterns can look like loyalty, like caring about people, like giving second chances. And they’re dangerous because they teach people that underperformance is acceptable, that standards are negotiable, that you don’t actually mean what you say about excellence.

So superintendents keep underperformers thinking it protects capacity. They avoid hard conversations thinking it maintains stability. They tolerate cancerous behavior thinking replacing people is too disruptive. They never recognize that keeping the wrong people in key seats destroys more capacity than temporarily having empty seats would. They don’t see that their fear of short-term disruption is creating permanent dysfunction.

The story always goes the same way. Project has underperformer in key seat. Everyone knows they need to go. Leadership keeps them because afraid of being short-handed. Underperformer continues destroying value. Best people get frustrated carrying extra load. Some leave. Project gets worse because now you’ve lost good people while keeping bad ones. Leadership still won’t act because now you’re even more short-handed. The dysfunction compounds. The project fails. And leadership never connects the failure to their refusal to make the people decisions that would have prevented it.

Nobody teaches superintendents that holding people accountable actually builds capacity instead of destroying it. That you won’t be short-handed if you’re recruiting, hiring, and training. That sometimes you need to lose ten to fifty percent of your people to build the culture that attracts the right people. That getting the right people in the right seats matters infinitely more than just keeping seats filled.

A Story From the Field About Making the Hard Call

When Paul Acres started his lean journey at FastCap, half the people left. Not a small percentage, half. Some quit because they didn’t like the new culture. Some were let go because they wouldn’t improve. Half the workforce gone. Most companies would panic. Most leaders would see that as catastrophic failure. Most would back off from the standards that created the exodus.

Paul didn’t. He held the line. The company established clear cultural expectations and process requirements. People who fit stayed. People who didn’t left or were invited to work elsewhere. And FastCap didn’t collapse from being short-handed. It thrived. Because the people who remained were bought in. They wanted to improve. They fit the culture. And that made all the difference.

The same pattern shows up on construction projects. A project was established with clear standards: clean, safe, organized, perfect, and beautiful. Five to ten percent of the workforce didn’t want to be there. Maybe one trade partner didn’t want to elevate to those standards. Difficult decisions came about. People who wouldn’t meet standards were invited to work elsewhere. And the project didn’t fall apart from being short-handed. It improved because everyone remaining was bought in.

Another example. A company terminated a project executive on a mega project because he was being cancerous and not leading the team. Everyone was afraid. Afraid they wouldn’t get work. Afraid of what would happen to the owner relationship. Afraid of what would happen to the job. They made the decision anyway. There was a little bit of fill-in that another person had to do. But it was great. They finished the project great. It all worked out for the best. The fear was unfounded. The hard decision was right.

There was a foreman removed on a project because he was cancerous. He wouldn’t fit in. Up until that point, he was totally destructive. That foreman and actually a superintendent on the project were removed. People were filtered around to the right seats. That project started jamming. Finished on time. The most common problem we have isn’t foremen themselves, it’s foremen being in the wrong seats on the bus, on the project site, and the project team not doing anything about it. If you have a cancerous non-performing foreman that is one of the most destructive things you can have on the project site.

Another example. The PM and the project executive on a two-hundred-fifty-million-dollar-plus project. They weren’t leading the project. No conflict resolution. They weren’t rallying the team. They weren’t performing. They were moved off the project. A new project executive came in. A new project manager came in. The team started jamming. They started hitting their dates. The whole project turned around. These are people-in-the-wrong-seat problems. Behavioral problems. Process and behavioral problems. We don’t blame the people for those things. We invite those people to go work somewhere else because their behaviors and actions might not fit into the overall culture of the project.

The lesson is consistent across every example. Make the hard people decision. Remove the underperformer. Get the right people in the right seats. And the project improves instead of collapsing. The fear of being short-handed is almost always unfounded when you’re recruiting, hiring, and training.

Why This Matters More Than Avoiding Disruption

When you keep underperformers because you’re afraid of being short-handed, you’re being held hostage. Not by market conditions or labor shortages or external constraints. By your own fear. By people who aren’t bought in. By the refusal to make hard decisions that would build the culture and capability you actually need.

Think about what Jim Collins teaches about the number one metric. In Beyond Entrepreneurship 2.0, he identifies one metric that towers above all others. One metric to track with obsession. One metric upon which the greatness of the entire enterprise hinges. And yet, ironically, for most companies, it’s rarely the metric first discussed. What’s that metric? The percentage of key seats on the bus filled with the right people for those seats.

Stop and think. What percentage of your key seats do you have filled with the right people? If your answer is less than ninety percent, you’ve just identified your number one priority. Not sales. Not profitability. Not project count. Getting the right people in the right seats. Because everything else flows from that. You can’t build excellence with people who aren’t bought in. You can’t create flow with people who won’t meet standards. You can’t establish culture with people who undermine it.

What makes a key seat? Any seat meeting one of three conditions. First, the person in that seat has the power to make significant people decisions. Second, failure in that seat could expose the entire enterprise to significant risk or potential catastrophe. Third, success in the seat would have a significantly outsized impact on company success. Foremen are key seats. Superintendents are key seats. Project managers are key seats. And if you’ve got underperformers in those seats because you’re afraid of being short-handed, you’re sabotaging your own success.

Here’s the question that reveals when it’s time to shift from develop to replace. Are you beginning to lose other people by keeping this person in the seat? If your best foreman is getting frustrated because you won’t address the underperforming one, you’re on the edge of losing capability to protect dysfunction. If your project team is demoralized because leadership won’t make the hard call, you’re trading future capacity for present avoidance. Do you have a values problem, a will problem, or a skills problem? Skills you can train. Values and will you can’t. What’s the person’s relationship to the window and the mirror? Do they look out and blame others or look in and own their part? Has your confidence in the person gone up or down in the past year? How would you feel if the person quit today? These questions reveal truth you already know but might be avoiding.

The principle is clear. Holding people accountable will not leave you short-handed as long as you are recruiting, hiring, and training. If you’re not doing those three things, you might be in trouble. But you could also reduce the annual volume of your business and actually do things right the first time instead of managing waste created by underperformers you’re afraid to replace. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development to build teams where the right people fill the right seats, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

Watch for These Signals You’re Being Held Hostage

Your project is vulnerable to the hostage problem when you see these patterns:

  • Best people carrying extra load to compensate for underperformers leadership won’t address, revealing that fear of being short-handed is costing you the capability you’re trying to protect
  • Standards eroding because enforcing them would require replacing people who won’t meet them, showing that culture is being defined by worst behavior tolerated instead of best behavior celebrated
  • Leadership energy consumed by managing underperformance instead of developing capability, indicating resources are being spent on people who shouldn’t be in those seats
  • Team morale dropping because people who execute well see people who don’t getting the same treatment, demonstrating that accountability without consequences teaches people consequences don’t exist

The Framework: Getting the Right People in the Right Seats

The goal isn’t eliminating everyone who makes mistakes or creating impossible standards. It’s understanding that you’re being held hostage by people who aren’t bought in. That keeping underperformers because you’re afraid of being short-handed is exactly what keeps you short-handed. That the right people in the right seats matter more than just filling seats.

Recruit, hire, and train at an accelerated rate before you need capacity. Don’t wait until you’re desperate to build bench strength. Expand your capacity before you expand your workload. Have people in development who can step into key seats when someone doesn’t fit. Companies that always have one or two or three people in development never get held hostage because when somebody ends up not being a cultural fit, they invite them to work somewhere else and put bench people into those spots. People who are doing work anyway, adding value, earning money. It’s shortsighted to not have enough people. Build capacity proactively, not reactively.

Blame the process and the behavior, not the people. This is a core lean principle. People structurally, for the most part, are doing everything they can to come in and do their best every day. Culture is the micro actions and beliefs and behaviors of a group. When someone isn’t performing, don’t blame them as a person. Look at whether the process failed them or whether their behaviors don’t fit the culture you’re building. Then make the decision clearly. Sometimes people fit better in different seats. Sometimes they fit better somewhere else entirely.

Work with your most bought-in players, not your resisters. Don’t spend massive time trying to convince people who don’t want to improve. Pour your development energy into people who are hungry for it. At field engineer boot camps, there are just as hungry people now as there were fifteen years ago. They want different things than previous generations. If you’re in a company focused on loyalty, in-office requirements, base salary incentive packages without bonuses, not a fun environment, it might be that these people are hungry—they’re just not hungry for you. Don’t blame people for being lazy. Look at whether your culture and process attract and develop the right people.

Decide your culture and enforce it consistently. Decide one hundred percent what your culture is. What processes you’ll follow. What behaviors you’ll follow. Then hold that line. When you establish clear standards—clean, safe, organized, perfect, beautiful projects, five to ten percent of the workforce might not want to be there. Some trade partners might not want to elevate to those standards. That’s okay. Let them go work somewhere they fit. You’re inviting people who can’t work there anymore to go somewhere they fit in. They don’t fit with excellence. That’s not blaming them as people. It’s recognizing that their behaviors don’t align with the culture you’re building.

Expect to lose ten to fifty percent when you establish real standards. Don’t think the lean journey is all butterflies and kittens. It’s a whole lot of “who’s on the bus and who’s not on the bus.” Paul Acres lost half his people. Large companies that identify core values and get firm with them see droves of people leave. Construction projects that establish real standards see five to ten percent of the workforce and maybe one trade partner leave. This is normal. This is expected. This is how culture gets built. If you’re not willing to take that risk, you can’t build the culture that attracts and keeps the right people.

The Practical Path Forward

Here’s how this works in practice. You’ve got an underperformer in a key seat. Everyone knows they need to go. You’re terrified of being short-handed. You need to decide whether to keep them or make the hard call.

First question: are you recruiting, hiring, and training? If no, start immediately. You can’t make hard people decisions without bench strength. If yes, you’ve already built the capacity to handle transitions. The fear of being short-handed is based on not having developed people ready to step in. Build that capacity first. Then the fear disappears because you have options.

Second question: is this person bought in or resisting? Skills problems you can train. Values problems you can’t. Will problems you can’t. If someone doesn’t want to improve, doesn’t fit the culture, resists the standards you’re establishing, development won’t fix that. You have a bus problem, not a seat problem. Help them find where they fit, which might be somewhere else.

Third question: are you losing other people by keeping this person? If your best foreman is getting frustrated because you won’t address the underperforming one, you’re about to lose capability to protect dysfunction. Make the hard call before you lose the people you actually want to keep. Your best people won’t tolerate environments where excellence and mediocrity get treated the same.

Make the decision clearly and act on it. Don’t let someone linger in a seat where they don’t fit. Decide whether they’re in the wrong seat or on the wrong bus. If wrong seat, help them find the right one. If wrong bus, help them find where they fit. Either way, act decisively. The longer underperformers stay in key seats, the more damage they do and the harder the eventual decision becomes.

Communicate the why to your team. When you make people decisions, your team needs to understand the framework. Not gossip about individuals, but clarity about culture and standards. “We’re building a culture where excellence matters. We help people find the right seats. When someone doesn’t fit, we help them find where they do.” Your best people need to see that performance matters, that standards are real, that you’ll make hard calls to protect culture.

Why This Protects Projects and People

We’re not just building projects. We’re protecting jobs, families, and futures from the dysfunction that underperformers create. And whether we make hard people decisions or avoid them because we’re afraid of being short-handed determines whether we build cultures that attract excellence or cultures that tolerate mediocrity.

When you keep underperformers, you’re not protecting jobs. You’re threatening them. Because underperformers destroy project success. Projects that fail cost everyone their jobs, not just the underperformer. Your best people leave environments where excellence isn’t required, taking their capability somewhere it’s valued. The underperformer you’re keeping to avoid being short-handed is exactly what’s making you short-handed by driving away the people you actually need.

When you make hard people decisions, you’re protecting everyone else. The project improves. Standards become real. Your best people see that performance matters. Culture attracts people who want to build instead of coast. Capacity grows because you’re developing bought-in people instead of managing resistant ones. Jobs become more secure because projects succeed when the right people are in the right seats.

This protects families by building cultures where people can thrive. When your best people are carrying extra load to compensate for underperformers you won’t address, they burn out. When they burn out, their families suffer. When you make the hard call and get the right people in the right seats, work becomes sustainable. Flow becomes possible. People can go home at reasonable hours because they’re not compensating for dysfunction you’re too afraid to fix.

Respect for people means making hard decisions that protect culture and capability. It means helping people find where they fit, even if that’s somewhere else. It means not forcing people who don’t fit to stay in seats that aren’t right for them. It means protecting your best people from the burden of carrying underperformers you’re too afraid to address. It means building cultures where excellence is required and rewarded, not just hoped for.

The Challenge in Front of You

You can keep avoiding the hard call. You can tolerate the underperformer because you’re afraid of being short-handed. You can let your best people carry extra load. You can watch standards erode. You can spend leadership energy managing dysfunction. You can let fear control your people decisions.

Or you can make the hard call. You can start recruiting, hiring, and training at an accelerated rate. You can build bench strength. You can get clear about your culture and enforce it. You can help people find the right seats or the right bus. You can accept that you might lose ten to fifty percent when you establish real standards. You can trust that the right people will come once you decide on your culture.

The projects with the strongest teams aren’t led by superintendents who avoid hard people decisions. They’re led by people who understand that holding people accountable won’t leave you short-handed if you’re recruiting, hiring, and training. Who recognize that you’re being held hostage by people who aren’t bought in. Who know that getting the right people in the right seats matters more than just filling seats. Who’ve made the hard calls and watched their projects improve instead of collapse.

You’ve got an underperformer in a key seat. Everyone knows it. You’re keeping them because you’re afraid of being short-handed. That fear is costing you more than the temporary disruption of making the hard call ever would. Your best people see it. Your culture is being defined by it. Your project is suffering from it.

Paul Acres lost half his people when he established real standards. His company thrived. Projects that removed cancerous foremen finished on time. The two-hundred-fifty-million-dollar project that replaced non-performing leadership started jamming. The fear was unfounded. The hard decision was right. Every single time.

Make the call. Get the right people in the right seats. Stop being held hostage by fear.

On we go.

 

Frequently Asked Questions

Won’t making hard people decisions actually leave us short-handed?

Only if you’re not recruiting, hiring, and training. The companies that are always developing bench strength never get held hostage because when somebody doesn’t fit, they have people ready to step in. Build capacity before you need it. Expand capability before you expand workload. Then people decisions don’t create crises because you have options. The fear of being short-handed is based on running too lean on development. Fix that first, then make people decisions from strength instead of fear.

How do you distinguish between someone who needs development and someone who needs to go?

Skills problems you can train. Values problems you can’t. Will problems you can’t. Ask: does this person want to improve? Do their behaviors align with our culture? Are they bought in? If yes, develop them. If no, help them find where they fit, which might be somewhere else. Also ask: are you beginning to lose other people by keeping this person in the seat? If your best people are getting frustrated, you’re protecting dysfunction at the cost of capability. That’s the signal to act.

What if we lose ten to fifty percent of our people when we establish standards?

That’s normal. That’s expected. Paul Acres lost half his people when he started his lean journey. Large companies that get firm about core values see droves leave. Construction projects that establish real standards see five to ten percent of the workforce leave. The people who remain are bought in. They want to improve. They fit the culture. And that makes all the difference. You can’t build excellence with people who don’t want it. Losing resisters to gain alignment is the trade that builds great companies.

How do we maintain capacity during transitions when people leave or are replaced?

This is why recruiting, hiring, and training at an accelerated rate matters so much. Have bench people in development. Have capacity built before you need it. Then when someone doesn’t fit, you’re not scrambling to fill the seat. You have people ready to step in. Companies that wait until they’re desperate to develop capacity get held hostage. Companies that build proactively never face that problem. The investment in development is what makes hard people decisions possible without creating crises.

What if the person has been with us a long time or contributed early on?

Loyalty to people who contributed early is real and important. But mercy cannot rob justice. Your obligation is to everyone on the team, not just one person. When someone who contributed early no longer fits, help them find where they do fit. Maybe a different seat. Maybe a different role. Maybe somewhere else entirely. Honor their contribution by helping them find success, even if that’s not in their current seat. But don’t sacrifice your best people and your culture to avoid making a hard decision about someone who doesn’t fit anymore.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

The Project Director – Roles & Responsibilities!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 30 min

Project Director Walked Through Office Straight To PM Office Shut Door And Talked Never Building Team Never Rallying Anyone Creating Detrimental Environment

Project site. Project director arrives. Operations manager. Executive. Walks through office. Walks past superintendent. Walks past field engineers. Walks past project coordinators. Goes straight into PM’s office. Shuts door. Talks. And talks. And talks. Never builds team. Never rallies everybody. Never checks in with superintendent. Never asks how workers are doing. Never participates in huddles. Never provides meaningful mentoring. Never assesses team health. Never gives connection relevance measurement. Just walks in. Shuts door with PM. Talks about technical items. Walks out. Leaves. And team suffers. Superintendent feels isolated. Field engineers feel disconnected. Project coordinator wonders if anyone cares. 

Workers never see leadership. Never feel valued. Never understand how they are relevant to bigger picture. And project becomes transactional instead of relational. Metrics instead of meaning. Tasks instead of team. Because project director forgot fundamental truth: project directors build people not just projects. This negative example stayed with Jason forever. What NOT to do. Because when project director does not show up way team needs them to team struggles. Not because they lack competence. But because they lack connection. Not because they cannot execute. But because they do not know they are relevant. Not because they are not winning. But because they do not know how to measure what winning looks like. Project directors are senior team builders not just managers. They curate environment where teams can win. They provide connection relevance measurement. They build people who build great things. When they fail at this everything else fails regardless of technical competence. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

Project Director Versus Project Manager Roles

Project manager will lead and develop project. Start to expand their role and own risk and lead team and negotiate and resolve conflict. Really lead and manage that team with very little oversight whether small midsize or large project. Become primary owner interface with excellent communication skills from pre-construction to construction to end of project.

Project director in contrast really helps own strategy from start to finish and will own strategy of multiple projects. Should be no oversight required. Project director or PX will work with executive level leadership within region or district. May be called project director or project executive but really point is to curate people to make sure that those multiple projects have well-built teams that can execute on their own. Yes they own client. Yes they own architect and engineer relationship. Yes they lead efforts in precon. But at end of day project director or project executive ensures that team has all same things that company would need for organizational health. Build team first. Create clarity around where that project is headed. Communicate that clarity. Reinforce that clarity through project systems just like company would reinforce it through human systems. Bottom line: all about team building.

Project Director Checklist Through Project Phases

Pre-sell and proposal phase: Project director should be engaged throughout process. Run point for all content. Review final proposals. Run point for interview preparation. Oversee interview not only preparation but be part of interview itself. Once award work with owner and client stay in touch.

Pre-construction: Stay with design team precon and estimating team to make sure we have good plan from start. That includes Takt plan. That includes general conditions GRs bid coverage. Make sure meeting owner’s conditions of satisfaction and really providing remarkable experience. Taking care of customer every step of process.

Design development phase: Setting up meetings with key trade partners. Overseeing right constructability reviews owner coordination early procurement. Engaging in early submittal process deferred design. Reviewing estimate. Making sure schedule logistics all construction management items being provided at right time in coordination with design and on budget. At this phase project executive director better be looking at how to build that team. Who is going to compose team? Do we have right GCs GRs? Do we have team reviewing Takt plan logistics plan Takt zone maps and basically general strategy of project? Do we have startup plan for project? Are all items scopes one-offs bought out that are needed to actually build project? Are we preparing for fresh eyes meeting to bring team on board?

Critical point: If project director ahead of completion of CD phase ahead of submission of GMP and signing owner contract is not pulling that team in pulling that superintendent in pulling that PM we are missing opportunity because we have to be developing that team from start even if they are on different projects. Need to be getting them to review plan. Best advantage in precon is that they create it themselves. Basically curating this process to where when they start when they break ground it is project manager’s and superintendent’s plan and they are working together in cohesive way.

What typically gets done well: Estimate. Trade partner buy-in. Early trade partner involvement. Deferred design. Deferred submittals. Permitting.

What typically does NOT get done well by project director: Use of Takt plan to where we have correct overall project duration. Bringing supers and PMs in early enough to where it is their plan. Making sure we have right team size right trailer layout right budgets for workers for bathrooms and lunchrooms. Right overall logistical support and GCs and GRs to pay for right logistics carpenters and laborers. These are generally things that really are not done well in pre-construction and we need to get to point where they are.

Anybody can review job. Anybody can do precon. Anybody can do estimating. Anybody can kind of curate that process. But can you do it where we get overall project duration right team size right team composition right funding for project support and right environments? Have we in pre-construction bought out in that process integrated production control system? If not we need to check ourselves and get that done.

Notice to proceed: Once received NTP prepare for mobilization. Project director takes huge part. Risk assessment. Making sure all financial systems set up. Contingencies set up and communicated to team. Monthly financial and project status check-in set up. Exposures and way to track exposures all set up. Once mobilized make sure team understands prime agreement. Procurement up and running. All financial systems up and running. Get buyout and submittals process going.

Most crucial part: Build team. Bringing team together through phases of forming storming norming and performing. Yes team writing contracts. Yes in middle of procurement. Yes in middle of mobilization. Yes queuing up self-perform. Yes making sure design is complete. Yes tracking contingency. Yes creating systems for change management. Yes mapping out plans for commissioning. Yes mapping out plans for owner move-in. All that stuff happening. But most important thing is that team is being built so they can manage that themselves and project director can check in at least once week but once month to make sure project running well. This stuff will all be fairly well hidden with non-transparent team. That is why important to bring team into concept training mode of having trust conflict goal setting accountability and performance really working in collaboration with project director to win themselves.

Daily Weekly Monthly Standard Work For Project Directors

Daily standard work for project directors:

  • Scale communication to teams for company or for critical issues daily
  • Receive scaled roadblocks from teams to help clear work and create flow in field
  • Provide prompt communication with owner about change conditions or safety incidents or anything they need to know about real time
  • Ask right questions about safety that morning day you check in
  • Make sure removing roadblocks for your teams fanatically
  • Be positive example and rally team with good energy
  • Participate in team huddles while on project and escalate critical issues to corporate

Notice: Nothing daily about regular management tasks. All team building stuff.

Weekly standard work:

  • Check in on team health address any concerns
  • Review roadblock tracking system – are we winning?
  • Perform safety check-in using instincts going out in field
  • Financial check-ins for contingency exposures payment sub pays regular pay applications to owner
  • Look at job cost projections
  • Look at critical submittals procurement make sure everything tracking
  • Check status of RFIs and buyout
  • Provide meaningful mentoring and training for PMs and PEs together line them out provide clarity make sure they have what they need
  • Participate with project superintendent do not just think she or he has it under control – go check in on schedule ask how things going
  • Check in with owner in person or by phone see how team doing
  • Assess meetings team is having and look ahead – see if they are anticipating things that need queued up for quality process roadblock removal upcoming phases
  • Get feel and teach and coach and mentor team

Monthly standard work:

  • Meaningful check-ins with supers – sitdown lunch
  • Check finances again change order management check payoffs
  • Make sure team doing healthy monthly project status check-ins check on coordination
  • Provide general training for team make sure people heading in good direction
  • Check in on environment the trailer
  • Check in on how team doing on health – maybe time to do off-site
  • Make sure team providing remarkable experience for client
  • Dig into some of biggest challenges team has
  • Do health check of team – maybe team health assessment to see what three things you should dive in and help team fix
  • Attend and participate in some of meetings they have on site get feel for how project going
  • Provide encouragement in three different ways: connection relevance measurement

Connection Relevance Measurement From Patrick Lencioni

Everybody needs connection relevance and measurement. On monthly basis question is: Have you connected with each member of that team? Have you communicated to them why they are relevant? Have you given them keys to success so they know how to measure what winning looks like daily? If answer is no there is no blame or shame but you have opportunity to go make huge difference in these people’s lives.

Recommend reading The Truth About Employee Engagement or what is sometimes called Three Signs of Miserable Job by Patrick Lencioni.

Signs Project Director Not Showing Up Way Team Needs

Watch for these patterns that signal project director not building people just managing projects:

  • Project director walks through office goes straight to PM’s office shuts door talks never builds team never rallies everybody never checks in with superintendent creating detrimental environment where team feels isolated disconnected undervalued
  • Superintendents say they have not heard from leader in years proving project director not checking in monthly not providing mentoring not taking care of people not helping careers not digging in not helping team anticipate phases not present not engaged
  • Project director says I do not like team building I do not like training I do not like organizational health stuff I do not like fluffy stuff I do not like dealing with superintendent getting into his business I just talk to PM I trust they are doing job showing lack of engagement
  • Team health suffers because project director focuses on technical items (estimate trade partner buy-in deferred design permitting) but misses crucial items (correct overall project duration bringing supers and PMs in early right team size right trailer layout right budgets for workers right environments)
  • Pre-construction does not buy out integrated production control system because project director curates estimate and contracts but not team building and systems that enable team to win
  • Monthly check-ins never happen or only focus on financial metrics RFIs submittals buyout but never provide connection (knowing team personally) relevance (why their work matters) measurement (how to know they are winning)

These are signs project director managing projects not building people. And when you build projects without building people projects suffer regardless of technical competence.

What Success Actually Looks Like For Project Directors

Measurement of success: Did we finish project on time with great safety and great quality on budget meaning we made full fee where owner is raving fan everybody met their career goals and team is super happy and healthy? Person that curates that environment is project director executive or operations manager.

This is not soft stuff. This is hard business results. Projects finish on time when teams are healthy. Projects finish on budget when teams communicate well. Owners become raving fans when teams provide remarkable experience. Team members meet career goals when project directors mentor and develop them. Teams stay happy and healthy when project directors provide connection relevance measurement.

You cannot separate team health from project success. They are same thing. Project directors who think they can manage projects without building people discover projects suffer. Technical competence without relational investment creates transactional environments where teams execute minimally. Relational investment with technical competence creates transformational environments where teams exceed expectations.

Best advice for PM or project executive or project director: read all of Patrick Lencioni’s books and use that to curate health of team. We have to make sure we are building great people who build great things.

The Challenge

Stop walking through office straight to PM’s office shutting door talking never building team never rallying anyone. Start providing connection relevance measurement to every team member monthly ensuring they know you care why their work matters and how to measure winning. Stop saying I do not like team building training organizational health fluffy stuff dealing with superintendent. Start recognizing leaders build teams first have hard conversations coach and mentor direct reports ensure remarkable meetings scale communication repeat vision seven times. Stop focusing only on technical items that typically get done well (estimate trade partner buy-in deferred design permitting). Start focusing on crucial items that typically do NOT get done well (correct overall project duration bringing supers and PMs in early right team size right environments integrated production control system). Stop thinking project director role is about managing multiple projects with no oversight required. Start recognizing project director role is about curating people ensuring multiple projects have well-built teams that can execute on their own. Stop measuring success only by on-time on-budget metrics. Start measuring success by: on time great safety/quality on budget/full fee owner raving fan everybody met career goals team super happy and healthy.

As Patrick Lencioni teaches: everybody needs connection relevance measurement. Have you connected with each member of team? Have you communicated why they are relevant? Have you given them keys to success so they know how to measure what winning looks like daily? Project directors build people not just projects. Build team first. Create clarity around where project headed. Communicate that clarity. Reinforce that clarity through project systems. Bring team together through forming storming norming and performing. Provide daily rallying and positive example. Provide weekly mentoring and coaching. Provide monthly meaningful check-ins. Check in with teams at least monthly even if remotely by Zoom. Because measurement of success is not just finishing on time on budget. Measurement of success is finishing on time with great safety/quality on budget making full fee with owner as raving fan where everybody met career goals and team is super happy and healthy. Person who curates that environment is project director. So dig in. Build great people who build great things. On we go.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is difference between project manager and project director roles?
Project manager leads and develops project with very little oversight becoming primary owner interface from pre-construction to end, while project director owns strategy of multiple projects curating people to ensure those projects have well-built teams that can execute on their own, project director builds people not just projects.

What do project directors typically do well versus what they miss?
Typically done well: estimate, trade partner buy-in, deferred design, permitting. Typically NOT done well: using Takt plan for correct overall project duration, bringing supers and PMs in early enough to where it is their plan, right team size, right trailer layout, right budgets for workers/bathrooms/lunchrooms, right environments, buying out integrated production control system in pre-construction.

What are daily weekly monthly standard work for project directors?
Daily: scale communication, receive scaled roadblocks, provide prompt owner communication, ask safety questions, remove roadblocks fanatically, rally team, participate in huddles. Weekly: check team health, review roadblocks, safety check-in, financial check-ins, provide meaningful mentoring. Monthly: meaningful check-ins with supers, check finances, assess team health, provide connection relevance measurement.

What are connection relevance measurement from Patrick Lencioni?
Everybody needs connection (knowing team personally), relevance (why their work matters), measurement (how to know they are winning), on monthly basis ask: have you connected with each member? Have you communicated why they are relevant? Have you given them keys to success so they know how to measure winning daily?

What does project director success actually look like?
Finished on time with great safety and great quality, on budget meaning made full fee, owner is raving fan, everybody met their career goals, team is super happy and healthy, person who curates that environment is project director, cannot separate team health from project success because they are same thing.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

Steadiness & Flow – An Excerpt from Elevating Construction Superintendents

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 33 min

Red Team Finished In 26 Weeks With 380 People And Blue Team Finished In 21 Weeks With 280 People Doing Same Work Because Variation Destroys Throughput

Creative Trades game. Seven participants sit around table. Each represents contractor for different scope: concrete steel facade and so on. Thirty-five chips on table represent 35 pieces of work that must be completed to finish project. Goal is to pass all chips through to last contractor as quickly as possible to simulate completion of work on project. To complete their work players roll die and pass that number of chips to person next to them. If someone rolls six but only has one chip at their station they can only send one chip forward. If they have six chips and roll one they can only move one chip. When everyone has rolled that represents one week of work and process is repeated for as many weeks necessary to move all chips to end. Often this game is played with different teams competing with each other to be team to finish their work in fewest number of weeks.

Red team got all 35 chips to end in 26 turns. When you tally number of workers on site you get 380. Maximum material inventory at any one location was 10. So in 26 weeks red team moved 35 units of work down line with 380 people and material inventory level of 10 units per week. Pretty good. How did blue team do? They completed work in 21 weeks with 280 people and maximum material inventory buildup of just 5 in given week. That means blue team was 5 weeks ahead of schedule with 100 fewer people on site and half material on site. How did they manage that?

Tricky secret is that red team had regular six-sided die with numbers ranging from one to six. Blue team had die that could only roll fours threes and twos. Week with normal die would be something like 6 5 5 2 2 1 and would represent attempt to move quickly at first followed by slowdown because of interruption and eventually ending up stuck. Week with blue team’s die might look like 4 3 4 3 2 2. This is synonymous with concept of maintaining flow of work. Flow has very little variation. When that variation is eliminated chips or work can flow from one end to another without getting held up by overwhelming rush from rolling six or painful crawl of one.

Cost comparison proves variation destroys projects. Twenty-six weeks with 380 workers is 380 people at $55 per hour at 40 hours week at 26 weeks equals $21.7 million. Twenty-one weeks with 280 workers is 280 people at $55 per hour at 40 hours week at 21 weeks equals $12.9 million. That is $8.8 million difference. This ratio can be scaled for whatever size project we are talking about. Differences in man-hours spent in waste because of lack of flow. Pushing literally destroys projects and our industry. Supers must protect us from this. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

What Movement Versus Production Actually Means

Before making lesson explicit let us reflect on current state of our industry. We often hear people say: we need to get out of ground fast when we can influence fewer number of contractors. This is correct. We also hear that we need to be aggressive with complex and unknown areas and scopes on our projects. This is also correct. Sometimes though well-meaning folks will apply both of those concepts to entire project and say things like: advance schedule whenever possible. I want all my materials here now. Just bring it. I am pusher. Keep pushing everything you can for schedule.

These people are trying to roll sixes in parade of trades which will later cause mess of ones. Consider this: what if we told superintendent to slow down little and keep steady flow and even pace? What would he say? He might say: we know absolutely nothing about construction and should go get another job. And yet data shows he will finish in 26 weeks with 380 people on site with material inventory of 10 like red team in Creative Trades.

This happens because people think movement equals production which is not the case. All this movement is actually waste. People start pushing and creating variation because it makes them feel good. It gives impression of progress but it requires twice as much material 100 more people and 5 more units of material inventory in week. What happens when superintendent will not keep flow in schedule and hold dates? If you are trade partner how would you react? You would possibly keep more people on site and most definitely keep more materials on site.

What happens when materials pile up on site? You guessed it. Production slows down. Everything slows down because part of our workforce is dedicated to managing moving inventorying fixing replacing reordering and organizing materials.

The Factory Throughput Lesson That Proves Variation Destroys Systems

Imagine factory with assembly line that produces certain number of finished items every hour. Throughput is rate at which factory can process raw materials into finished items. Say you have four machines in factory that work together to produce final finished product. Items need to be moved from one machine to next for that machine to do its part in process. First machine can work on four items per hour. Second at two items per hour. Both third and fourth machines produce four items per hour. What is throughput of system per hour? Did you say two?

Now what could we do to get all machines working at same rate? Speed up two-part per hour machine. That is correct. We can either add another machine or replace it with faster one. What would throughput of this system be then? Did you say four? That is correct. But what if we did not speed up two-part per hour machine? What else could be done to get everyone working in same rate? Yes that is correct. We could slow down fours and get everyone working at throughput of two parts per hour.

Here is moment. You said throughput of first example where we had all machines working at full efficiency even though they were going different speeds was two. This may surprise you but it is likely going to be 1.25 or 1.5 finished items per hour. Consider what happens between first and second machines. Inventory of materials begins to pile up. Manpower is then allocated to manage material inventory. Space in factory diminishes. People who would otherwise be running machines are now managing machines and material inventory. Workers down line are waiting and more resources are needed to manage materials on third and fourth machines. Waste increases and speed of system decreases. Therefore throughput of 1.5 or fewer finished items per hour instead of two.

That is throughput. They would have been better off to increase two-part per hour machine to four-part per hour machine or slow everything down to two. That would at least have throughput of two parts per hour. When anyone on site says: work everywhere at full efficiency. Keep pushing. Bring all materials here now. Do not slow down anything. I want workers working everywhere on site with no empty areas. All they are doing is slowing down speed of production by increasing material inventory and creating lot of wasted jobs for people who would otherwise not be needed on that site.

Why? Because we needed flow. What we got was variation. If this was parade of trades we needed to roll consistent threes and fours instead of sixes and ones.

When To Push And When To Flow

Answer is not to push all time. Ideal is somewhere in between. Anything on site that can be made to flow should. If we are coming out of ground or have complex area on site with high-risk unknowns those may be good reasons to accelerate. Point is that pushing comes at risk and flow will always reduce materials manpower mistakes and time it takes to do something. So if you can create flow do it. If you must pull area know consequences and do it only if you must put work in place early to vet mistakes early. But for no reason should you push on site and create variation. Do not roll sixes and ones when you can roll threes.

Art of Takt means artfully taking advantage of opportunities to plan prepare and move strategically. If you hear someone ask to create variation in schedules and flow be skeptical. If you hear folks ask for increase in material inventory give it second look. We want to create stable environments keep workers installing work they plan for day or week and have plan for everything.

Important reflection is cost associated with it as well. If you compare just in Creative Trades example cost difference between red team and blue team you get $8.8 million difference. This ratio can be scaled for whatever size project we are talking about. Differences in man-hours spent in waste because of lack of flow. Pushing literally destroys projects and our industry. Supers must protect us from this.

Signs You Are Creating Variation Instead Of Flow

Watch for these patterns that signal you are rolling sixes and ones instead of threes and fours:

  • Superintendent says advance schedule whenever possible or I want all materials here now or just bring it or I am pusher or keep pushing everything creating variation that requires twice as much material 100 more people 5 more units of inventory slowing production through waste
  • Trade partners keep more people on site and more materials on site because superintendent will not hold dates or keep flow creating inventory buildup where workforce dedicates time to managing moving inventorying fixing replacing reordering organizing materials instead of installing work
  • Workers working everywhere on site with no empty areas sounds efficient but actually slows throughput because resources spread too thin creating stacking waiting trade conflicts coordination failures proving movement does not equal production
  • Factory machines running at full efficiency with different speeds (4-2-4-4 items per hour) produces 1.25-1.5 items per hour instead of 2 because inventory piles up between machines consuming manpower space resources proving individual efficiency destroys system throughput
  • Project finishes on time but at massive expense to owner trades and finances burning through budget with excessive manpower material inventory rework because pushed instead of flowed proving finishing on time does not mean finishing well
  • Team celebrates early completion without examining cost showing finished 5 weeks early but spent $8.8 million more than necessary because created variation instead of maintaining flow destroying profitability while claiming success

These are signs you are pushing when you should be flowing. Rolling sixes and ones when you should roll threes.

The Cost Of Pushing Versus Flowing

Many supers will say: I have been doing this for over 30 years and have always finished on time. This is correct but at what expense to project owner and trades and their finances? It deserves deeper look and further consideration. When you compare red team versus blue team in Creative Trades game you see what pushing costs.

Red team: regular die rolling 1-6. Finished in 26 weeks. Required 380 workers. Maximum inventory 10 units. Total cost: 380 people at $55 per hour at 40 hours week at 26 weeks equals $21.7 million. Blue team: limited die rolling 2-4. Finished in 21 weeks. Required 280 workers. Maximum inventory 5 units. Total cost: 280 people at $55 per hour at 40 hours week at 21 weeks equals $12.9 million.

Difference: Blue team finished 5 weeks earlier with 100 fewer people with half inventory at $8.8 million less cost. Same work. Same chips moving through system. Only difference: variation versus flow. Red team tried to roll sixes creating massive rushes followed by painful crawls of ones creating inventory buildup resource waste coordination chaos. Blue team rolled consistent threes and fours creating steady flow eliminating inventory buildup maintaining rhythm protecting throughput.

Scale this to any project size. Hundred million dollar project. Two hundred million dollar project. Billion dollar project. Ratio holds. When you push instead of flow you spend millions more. Require hundreds more workers. Create massive inventory levels. Extend duration. Destroy profitability. All while thinking you are being efficient aggressive productive. When reality: you are being wasteful chaotic destructive.

This is why flow matters. Not soft principle. Not nice-to-have. Not theoretical. Mathematical principle. Proven through Creative Trades game. Proven through factory throughput calculations. Proven through cost comparisons. Proven through projects that maintain rhythm versus projects that push randomly. Flow shortens durations. Flow decreases costs. Flow respects workers. Flow creates balance for families. Pushing destroys all of that.

What Happens When Superintendent Won’t Hold Flow

What happens when superintendent will not keep flow in schedule and hold dates? If you are trade partner how would you react? You would possibly keep more people on site and most definitely keep more materials on site. What happens when materials pile up on site? Production slows down. Everything slows down because part of workforce is dedicated to managing moving inventorying fixing replacing reordering and organizing materials.

Consider factory example again. First machine produces 4 items per hour. Second machine produces 2 items per hour. Third and fourth machines produce 4 items per hour. If you run all machines at full efficiency what happens? Inventory piles up between first and second machines. Four items per hour coming in. Only two items per hour going out. Inventory grows by 2 items every hour. After 8 hours: 16 items piled up. After 40 hours: 80 items piled up. Space consumed. Manpower allocated to manage inventory. People who should run machines now managing piles. Workers down line waiting because second machine cannot keep up. Resources needed to manage materials on third and fourth machines. Waste increases. Speed decreases. Throughput drops to 1.25-1.5 items per hour instead of 2.

Same thing happens on construction site. Superintendent says: bring all materials now. Get everyone working everywhere. Push schedule whenever possible. Advance dates randomly. Do not hold rhythm. What happens? Materials pile up. Deliveries uncoordinated. Inventory levels spike. Space consumed. Workers spend time managing moving protecting materials instead of installing. Coordination breaks down because trades stacked. Sequence interrupted because materials blocking access. Quality suffers because rushing. Safety incidents increase because chaos. And throughput drops. Project takes longer. Costs more. Burns out workers. Destroys families.

All because superintendent would not hold flow. Would not keep rhythm. Would not protect steady pace. Tried to roll sixes and ones instead of threes and fours.

The Challenge

Stop saying advance schedule whenever possible or I want all materials here now or just bring it or I am pusher or keep pushing everything. Start recognizing these statements create variation requiring twice as much material 100 more people 5 more units of inventory slowing production through waste. Stop thinking movement equals production celebrating activity as progress. Start recognizing all this movement is actually waste and impression of progress requires massive expense destroying profitability. Stop running all machines at full efficiency with different speeds thinking individual efficiency creates system efficiency. Start recognizing inventory piles up between machines consuming manpower space resources dropping throughput from 2 to 1.25-1.5 proving individual efficiency destroys system throughput. Stop saying I have been doing this for 30 years and always finished on time as if that proves effectiveness. Start asking at what expense to project owner trades and their finances recognizing finishing on time but spending $8.8 million more than necessary is not success. Stop pushing when you should be flowing creating variation when you should create rhythm. Start recognizing anything on site that can be made to flow should flow and pushing comes at risk that flow eliminates.

As Creative Trades game teaches: red team with regular die finished in 26 weeks with 380 people at $21.7 million. Blue team with limited die finished in 21 weeks with 280 people at $12.9 million. Difference: $8.8 million saved by eliminating variation and maintaining flow. Do not roll sixes and ones when you can roll threes and fours. Flow has very little variation. When that variation is eliminated work can flow from one end to another without getting held up by overwhelming rush from rolling six or painful crawl of one. Flow will always reduce materials manpower mistakes and time it takes to do something. Only flow will shorten durations. Only flow will decrease costs. Only flow will respect workers. Only flow will create balance for families. That is why we are so focused on it. If you can create flow do it. If you must pull area know consequences and do it only if you must put work in place early to vet mistakes early. But for no reason push on site and create variation. Art of Takt means artfully taking advantage of opportunities to plan prepare and move strategically. Create stable environments. Keep workers installing work they plan for day or week. Have plan for everything. Protect flow. Guard rhythm. Roll threes not sixes. On we go.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Creative Trades game and what does it teach about flow?
Seven participants represent contractors passing 35 chips through system by rolling dice, red team with regular die (1-6) finished in 26 weeks with 380 people and $21.7M cost, blue team with limited die (2-4) finished in 21 weeks with 280 people and $12.9M cost, difference of $8.8M proving variation destroys throughput while flow creates efficiency.

Why does running factory machines at full efficiency actually slow throughput?
Four machines at 4-2-4-4 items per hour should produce 2 per hour but actually produces 1.25-1.5 because inventory piles up between first and second machines consuming manpower and space, people managing inventory instead of running machines, workers waiting, resources managing materials, waste increasing, speed decreasing proving individual efficiency destroys system throughput.

What happens when superintendent won’t keep flow and hold dates?
Trade partners keep more people on site and more materials on site, materials pile up, production slows down because workforce dedicates time to managing moving inventorying fixing replacing reordering organizing materials instead of installing work, coordination breaks down, sequence interrupted, quality suffers, safety incidents increase, throughput drops, project takes longer costs more burns out workers.

When should you push and when should you flow?
Flow anything on site that can be made to flow, if coming out of ground or have complex area with high-risk unknowns those may be good reasons to accelerate, but pushing comes at risk and flow will always reduce materials manpower mistakes and time, so create flow when possible, only pull area if must put work in place early to vet mistakes early, never push to create variation.

Why do people think movement equals production when it’s actually waste?
People start pushing and creating variation because makes them feel good gives impression of progress, but rolling sixes creates overwhelming rush followed by painful crawls of ones requiring twice as much material 100 more people 5 more units of inventory, all this movement is waste not production, flow eliminates this by rolling consistent threes and fours maintaining rhythm protecting throughput.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

A Superintendent’s Standing Orders!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 35 min

Superintendent Moved Takt Wagon Early Thursday Instead Of Monday And Rippled Variation Through Everyone’s Plans Slowing Entire Team

Superintendent with Takt plan. Takt wagon A scheduled for 5 days finishes in 3 days. Two days early. Superintendent thinks: we are ahead of schedule. Let us keep momentum going. Takt wagon B scheduled to start Monday. But wagon A finished Thursday. So superintendent decides: move wagon B to Thursday. Start early. Keep everyone busy. Be efficient. Get work done faster. And makes decision. Calls foreman. Says: you are starting Thursday instead of Monday. And foreman says: but our materials scheduled for Monday delivery. Our crew planned for Monday start. Our coordination meeting set for Monday morning. Our equipment reserved for Monday. Our prefabrication timed for Monday installation. Superintendent says: figure it out. We are ahead. We need to stay ahead. Go. And chaos erupts. Materials scheduled for Monday now need Thursday. Supplier cannot deliver early. No inventory buffer staged. Foreman scrambles to find temporary materials. Manpower planned for Monday now needs Thursday. Crew working different job until Monday. Foreman pulls them early. Other job falls behind. Creates variation there too. Equipment coordinated for Monday now needs Thursday. Already reserved for different project. Foreman rents backup equipment at premium cost. Following trades planned around Monday start now have gaps in their schedule. 

They planned to start Tuesday in wagon A while wagon B starts Monday. Now wagon B starting Thursday means they cannot start Tuesday. They have gap. They send crew to different area. Creates stacking. Prefabrication timed for Monday delivery now comes Thursday. Sits on site for 4 days. Takes up space. Gets damaged. Needs protection. Creates excess inventory. Supply chains disrupted. Vendor planned delivery route for Monday pickup. Now needs special Thursday delivery. Charges premium. Other customers on Monday route now delayed. Just-in-time deliveries now just-in-chaos. Everything that was coordinated for rhythm now scrambled for speed. And superintendent thinks: I am being efficient. Getting work done faster. Keeping everyone busy. Making progress. But reality: slowing down team. Burdening everyone. Creating variation. Destroying throughput. Rippling chaos through everyone’s plans. Because when you hold rhythm you create flow. When you break rhythm you create chaos. When you hold start dates you create predictability. When you move start dates randomly you create variation. And variation destroys throughput. Variation slows projects. Variation costs money. Not because people are lazy. But because systems fail when rhythm breaks. This is why superintendent’s standing orders exist. To protect production. To guard flow. To hold the line. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

The Gladiator Scene That Explains Superintendent’s Role

There is scene in Gladiator. Russell Crowe attacking German tribes in Germania. Russell Crowe gets with his cavalry. On other side of Germans dispatches infantry. Starts to let archers rain down on Germans. On backside Russell Crowe says: what we do in life echoes throughout eternity. Hold the line. Stay with me. Then he goes on to speech where he says: if you find yourself riding through fields with sun on your face do not be troubled. Then starts down and again says: hold the line. Stay with me. Whole time saying: hold the line. Stay with me. What he wants is everybody to stay together in line together in holding pattern so they do not get hit by their archers and so they will meet Germans perfectly on front and on back and be able to destroy enemy.

That is message. When we are on construction project if we want to run our schedule really well we will use Takt planning. And it really only works when we follow rhythm. When it is easily shown on single page. When we can see all three types of flow: workflow, trade flow, logistical flow. When we bring materials just in time according to right material inventory buffers. When we hold start and end dates. When we prefabricate as much as we can. When we remove roadblocks as our first priority and control geographical areas together as team. When we focus on throughput of system not on individual separate and siloed efficiencies. When we optimize bottlenecks. When we finish work as we go. Limit work in process. When we focus on quality at source. And when we reduce variation throughout system. That is how we run good schedule. But none of that matters if we cannot get superintendents on board with these following concepts.

Hold the line. Stay with me. Do not move Takt wagon B from Monday to Thursday just because Takt wagon A finished early. Do not ripple variation through everyone’s plans. Do not break rhythm thinking you are being efficient. Hold the line. Keep rhythm. Protect flow. That is superintendent’s standing order.

Superintendent’s Standing Orders For Takt Control

If Takt planning is part of your project you will be wildly successful if you also have Takt control. In order to control superintendent must follow these principles. Standard work that superintendents must follow to guard production and protect flow.

From planning and scheduling and control standpoint superintendent must use Takt plan to plan execute and adjust work. Have that in her or his hand daily. When problems arise do not just make decisions willy-nilly. Take it back or right there on iPad real time in field simulate what that change does to all three types of flow: workflow trade flow and logistical flow. Superintendent has to use Takt planning and Takt control to plan and execute work and to adjust work when problems arise.

Superintendent has to hold schedule start and end dates to reduce variation in materials manpower equipment and variation. Do not move trades sooner at random. If Takt wagon A finishes in 3 days instead of 5 do not move Takt wagon B early from Monday to Thursday. When you do you ripple variation through plans of everyone on site and it slows down team and burdens everybody. You cannot do that. You have to hold start dates and you have to hold end dates so you can keep consistent rhythm.

Good superintendent will use Takt schedule for six week three week and weekly work planning schedules. Superintendent should be proficient in understanding and reducing eight wastes and being able to see eight wastes and know that overproduction and excess inventory are mothers and fathers of wastes and also be able to see unevenness and overburden.

Superintendent must run clean site. If superintendent cannot run clean site they cannot do anything else. If that superintendent cannot run organized site they cannot do anything else. If that superintendent cannot be organized and clean they cannot be safe. That is how formula works. Cleanliness plus organization equals safety. Superintendent has to do that or he or she cannot do anything else. They need training. They need help. We need to love them. We need to send them somewhere to get help so they can run clean site because that is where it all starts.

Superintendent must also run effective foreman and worker huddles so they can scale information from scheduling systems in flow. Superintendent must share openly problems he or she faces with company and be able to scale and widen circle with problems and get help.

For team and system to make money superintendent must do following to follow production laws. Superintendent must plan areas in small batch sizes. Superintendent must limit work in process and not just push everything to get done. Superintendent must finish work as he or she goes and close work down also to limit work in process. Superintendent must reduce variation by holding dates and keeping work consistent. Superintendent must see and prevent roadblocks in that system as his or her main priority. Lastly superintendent must always attempt to optimize bottlenecks and get flow happening on project site.

The Four Production Laws Superintendents Must Obey

To be successful superintendent must comply with science mathematics and wisdom of history by obeying production laws and implementing standard work listed above. Production laws are:

Little’s Law: You have to have small batch sizes and improve your cycle times. When you batch work doing entire floor at once before moving to next scope you increase work in process. You increase cycle time. You slow throughput. Instead break work into small Takt zones. Finish each zone completely as you go. Move work down line in smaller amounts. One piece flow. This reduces work in process. Improves cycle time. Increases throughput. Finishes project faster.

Law of Bottlenecks: You must optimize and improve your bottlenecks and new bottlenecks will show up. Identify slowest Takt wagon in sequence. That is bottleneck. If mechanical overhead takes 15 days and everything else takes 5 days mechanical is bottleneck. Optimize it. Prefabricate more. Add crew. Improve coordination. Get it to 10 days. Now electrical becomes new bottleneck at 8 days. Optimize that. Keep optimizing bottlenecks as they appear. Never let faster trades go faster than Takt time. That creates stacking and variation and inventory buildup. Level everyone to rhythm.

Law of Effect of Variation: When variation enters system throughput times or project durations increase. Moving Takt wagon from Monday to Thursday is variation. Changing crew sizes randomly is variation. Adjusting material delivery dates without coordination is variation. Not holding start dates is variation. Each variation ripples through system. Disrupts coordination. Breaks rhythm. Slows throughput. Extends duration. Even when individual action seems efficient like starting early overall system slows down. Because variation destroys flow.

Kingman’s Formula: Cycle time or any process duration within area is affected by its normal cycle time but also its capacity utilization and how much variation affects system. This means if you run at 100% capacity utilization with any variation you create massive delays. Need buffer time. Need inventory buffers. Need capacity buffers. Cannot run everything at maximum all time. When you do variation destroys you. This is why holding Takt rhythm with appropriate buffers works better than pushing everything to maximum speed. Rhythm with buffers beats speed without buffers every time.

Signs You Are Not Following Superintendent’s Standing Orders

Watch for these patterns that signal you are not guarding production and protecting flow:

  • You move Takt wagon start dates randomly when earlier wagon finishes early thinking you are being efficient when really you are rippling variation through everyone’s plans disrupting materials manpower equipment prefabrication and supply chains slowing entire system
  • Site stays dirty and disorganized despite knowing cleanliness plus organization equals safety proving you cannot do anything else effectively until you master this foundation
  • You push everything to get done maximizing work in process instead of limiting work in process and finishing as you go creating chaos where nothing fully completes and punch list explodes at end
  • You allow faster trades to continue going faster than Takt time instead of leveling everyone to rhythm creating trade stacking inventory buildup and variation destroying flow
  • You make scheduling decisions willy-nilly without simulating what change does to workflow trade flow and logistical flow breaking coordination and creating unintended consequences
  • You white knuckle through problems trying to maintain discipline through willpower instead of changing circumstances to make right behaviors easier exhausting yourself and eventually justifying wrong behaviors

These are signs you are not holding the line. Not staying with team. Not protecting production through standing orders.

White Knuckling Versus Changing Circumstances

Before discussing standing orders further need to understand human mind. We have exhaustible not inexhaustible supply of self-discipline. Study took lines of people. One line had to remember certain series of eight numbers. Other line did not. They would go through maze type thing. At end was big table of donuts and treats and goodies. Folks had already decided not to partake of goodies. But at end line that had to remember eight numbers was at least twice as likely to partake of goodies. Researchers concluded that because one line of people had to remember those eight numbers and that took mental discipline by time they got down to end and then had to tell themselves hey do not eat this their mental discipline to certain extent was exhausted.

Craft workers after 10:00 AM have difficult time. Project managers and superintendents in afternoons have difficult time with mental discipline. Judges attempting to be fair and impartial in court of law after lunch at end of day especially when not being able to eat lunch are three times as likely to convict criminals. As human beings we have exhaustible amount of mental discipline. If we are struggling with addiction or habit or want to go jogging or get something done we can white knuckle it or we can change our circumstances.

White knuckling is like white water rafting trip where you are so scared and grabbing onto something so much blood rushes out of your hands and knuckles and they look white and pale. Gritting to get through situation. Human mind will either adhere to certain discipline or form of integrity or it will get tired to point where your mind will seek to justify that behavior and intellectually say it is okay. It will either fix problem or it will justify you having problem. It will not stay in contradictory gap situation.

For example if somebody said my personal goal is to not look at pornography. You are either going to fix that or for while you are going to white knuckle that or live in misery until your mind says: all right bro you are not doing this for very long. You are either going to get this fixed or I am going to start convincing you that this is okay and to just give into it. You are either going to fix it or eventually you are going to learn to justify it. Problem is when people say I have got this problem I am just going to white knuckle through it. Nobody said to do that. If you are addicted to pornography alcohol food white knuckling it is not going to get you through this. In fact it might eventually reinforce behavior and you will end up worse off than you were before.

You have to get inspired creative proven track record type circumstance and time changes in your life to make it easier so habits that are already on pre-recorded script can be broken and you can get into better situation. When we talk about getting through something we have to have clarity on what we want. We have to know when we are not on track. We have to interrupt pattern that is hurting us. Fill that void with good and wonderful things that we can be even more addicted to. Get accountability partner or mentor. That is how system works.

Most people do not get clarity on what they want. Do not fully know how what they are doing does not keep them on that path of clarity. Do not interrupt pattern. Just try and white knuckle in pattern. Do not fill void with more happy and addictive good things. Do not get accountability partner. So literally they are living hell on earth. If you want to change something if you want to be on better path you have to flip script break pattern find circumstances that support you.

Same thing with being on project site. You want to do daily reports or be in your schedule or whatever it is. Why are you not putting yourself in right habit loops with right space and time to support those things and make it easier instead of white knuckling that habit? Change circumstances. Make standing orders easier to follow. Create systems that support right behaviors instead of white knuckling discipline.

The Challenge

Stop moving Takt wagon start dates randomly when earlier wagon finishes early thinking you are being efficient. Start holding start dates and end dates to keep consistent rhythm recognizing moving dates ripples variation through everyone’s plans disrupting materials manpower equipment prefabrication supply chains slowing entire system. Stop running dirty disorganized site thinking you can still be effective with other responsibilities. Start mastering cleanliness plus organization equals safety foundation recognizing if you cannot run clean site you cannot do anything else. Stop pushing everything to get done maximizing work in process creating chaos where nothing fully completes. Start limiting work in process finishing as you go closing work down reducing punch list explosion at end. Stop allowing faster trades to continue going faster than Takt time creating trade stacking and inventory buildup. Start leveling everyone to rhythm optimizing bottlenecks rather than letting fast trades create variation. Stop making scheduling decisions willy-nilly without simulating impact on three flows. Start using Takt plan daily simulating what changes do to workflow trade flow logistical flow before making decisions. Stop white knuckling discipline trying to maintain standing orders through willpower alone. Start changing circumstances creating systems that make right behaviors easier supporting yourself instead of exhausting mental discipline.

As Gladiator teaches: hold the line. Stay with me. What we do in life echoes throughout eternity. When you hold rhythm you create flow. When you break rhythm you create chaos. When you hold start dates you create predictability. When you move start dates randomly you create variation. Superintendent’s standing orders exist to protect production guard flow hold the line. Use Takt plan to plan execute adjust work. Hold schedule start and end dates to reduce variation. Use Takt schedule for six week three week weekly work planning. Be proficient in understanding and reducing eight wastes. Run clean site because cleanliness plus organization equals safety. Run effective foreman and worker huddles to scale information. Share openly problems to widen circle get help. Plan areas in small batch sizes. Limit work in process. Finish work as you go. Reduce variation by holding dates keeping work consistent. See and prevent roadblocks as main priority. Always attempt to optimize bottlenecks get flow happening. These are standing orders. Not suggestions. Laws. Production laws. Little’s Law. Law of Bottlenecks. Law of Effect of Variation. Kingman’s Formula. Obey them. Hold the line. Stay with team. Guard production. Protect flow. On we go.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why can’t I move Takt wagon start date early if previous wagon finishes early?
Moving Takt wagon from Monday to Thursday when previous wagon finishes early ripples variation through everyone’s plans, materials scheduled for Monday cannot deliver Thursday, manpower planned for Monday working different job, equipment coordinated for Monday already reserved, following trades planned around Monday start now have gaps, prefabrication timed for Monday delivery now sits on site creating excess inventory, supply chains disrupted, just-in-time becomes just-in-chaos, hold start dates to keep consistent rhythm.

What does “cleanliness plus organization equals safety” mean for superintendents?
If superintendent cannot run clean site they cannot do anything else, if cannot run organized site cannot do anything else, if cannot be organized and clean cannot be safe, this is foundation that must be mastered first before attempting any other responsibilities because without this base nothing else works.

What are the four production laws superintendents must obey?
Little’s Law: small batch sizes improve cycle times. Law of Bottlenecks: optimize bottlenecks and new ones will show up. Law of Effect of Variation: when variation enters system throughput times increase. Kingman’s Formula: cycle time affected by normal cycle time plus capacity utilization plus variation, must comply with science mathematics and wisdom of history by obeying these laws.

Why is white knuckling discipline ineffective compared to changing circumstances?
Human beings have exhaustible not inexhaustible supply of mental discipline, study showed people who had to remember eight numbers were twice as likely to eat donuts at end because mental discipline was exhausted, mind will either fix problem or justify having problem but will not stay in contradictory gap, so change circumstances to make right behaviors easier instead of white knuckling through willpower alone.

What are superintendent’s standing orders for Takt control?
Use Takt plan daily to plan execute adjust work simulating changes on three flows, hold start and end dates to reduce variation, use Takt schedule for six week three week weekly planning, understand and reduce eight wastes, run clean organized safe site, run effective huddles, plan small batch sizes, limit work in process, finish as you go, reduce variation, prevent roadblocks as main priority, optimize bottlenecks, these protect production and guard flow.

If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

Setting Boundaries!

Posted on by Jason Schroeder
Read 37 min

You Are Not Setting The Right Boundaries On Construction Project And You Deserve To Because Boundaries Protect Everyone From Chaos

Research laboratory project. Jason decided he was going to make sure people did their own work. Ran their own crews. Implemented contractor grading. Set proper boundaries. Not in emotional dramatic way. But in dispassionate way: I do not expect anything from you but I do have standards and I will appreciate everything good that you do but I am still going to do the right thing. These are my boundaries. And trades pushed back. Said: this is too rigid. Too controlling. Too demanding. But Jason held line. Because when boundaries are crossed and you allow people to do that you end up playing savior with people. 

If you let people treat you any kind of way. If you let people disrespect you. If you let people do that in your organization that is going to become culture. Culture is behaviors and beliefs of social group. If you let people cross boundaries that becomes culture. And that culture determines your success. So Jason set boundaries for trades: must keep site clean, must keep site organized, everyone must be safe according to orientation and basic OSHA safety training, trades must complete their daily reports and do their basic legal requirements on project site. Those are boundaries. Those will take place. Jason will stand in way. Two options: employers either going to fire him or they are going to work within these boundaries because it is right thing to do. And contractor grading sheet is literally just formal way of having boundaries. Is trade partner clean? Have they had to be reminded to be clean? Are they taking care of campus or neighbors? Do all crews have safety plans JHAs and pre-task plans for their daily work and turned in? Are foreman and workers on time for huddles? Are deliveries scheduled coordinated and on time? Are materials and manpower ready for commitments that week? Those are boundaries. 

If somebody crosses those boundaries then we will do right thing. Adjust process. Adjust situation. Remove person from project. But those things will happen. And most important boundary: clean and steady. We are not going to make workers go fast to overcompensate for failure in project. They will work at steady and reasonable and responsible pace but they will not go fast and be forced to be put in unsafe situations. That is boundary. And project finished on time. Under budget. With remarkable stability. Not because Jason was controlling. But because boundaries protected everyone from chaos created when standards do not exist. If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

The Difference Between Emotions And Boundaries

There is difference between somebody who has emotions and somebody who has boundaries. And it is totally okay for us to have boundaries. A lot of us have tendencies to get mad. And we use anger as crutch. But real woman and real man once they have arrived at that state of training in that mindset can have difficult conversations without getting angry. Meaning they will get into mental paradigm where they still will do right thing.

Here are couple different circumstances we find ourselves in. If we expect lot of things from other people and we do not appreciate what is best or maybe we even do. But when we expect things from other people then when we are disappointed it causes emotional response or we use emotional response anger or sadness or whatever to manipulate other people most of time. And most people do not like hearing this when they first hear it but it is true. Most of time our emotional responses are way to manipulate other people and to assert control.

When we can get to point where we say: you know what I do not expect anything from others. I expect certain standards and I appreciate best that everyone has to give. Then we can get to really powerful point in our lives where we do not ever have to get angry. Where we can legitimately say: oh that did not happen. Well it still needs to happen. So I am going to do right thing. I am still going to do right thing but I am not going to get mad about it. So expect nothing. Expect certain circumstances and standards but appreciate people’s best and still do right thing according to circumstances and project standards that you need. That way we do not blame people. We start to blame process.

What in process is failing us to point where we need to go ahead and get it fixed? Then we can just say: all right this did not happen. What can we fix in process? And if there are behaviors processes and behaviors that are failing us we just take care of it in dispassionate way. We have boundaries.

Boundaries Jason Sets For Trade Partners

Jason’s boundaries for trade partners are clear and non-negotiable. Trades must keep site clean. Trades must keep site organized. Everyone must be safe according to orientation and basic OSHA safety training. Trades must complete their daily reports and do their basic legal requirements on project site. That is it. Everyone has to do that. Those are boundaries. Those will take place and Jason will stand in way. Two options: employers either going to fire him or they are going to work within these boundaries because it is right thing to do.

Contractor grading sheet is literally just formal way of having boundaries. Is trade partner clean? Have they had to be reminded to be clean? Are they taking care of campus or neighbors? Do all crews have safety plans JHAs and pre-task plans for their daily work and turned in? Are foreman and workers on time for huddles? Are deliveries scheduled coordinated and on time? Are materials and manpower ready for commitments that week? Those are boundaries. If somebody crosses those boundaries then we will do right thing. Adjust process. Adjust situation. Remove person from project. But those things will happen.

One of most important boundaries is clean and steady. We are not going to make workers go fast to overcompensate for failure in project. They will work at steady and reasonable and responsible and maybe little bit quick pace but they will not go fast and be forced to be put in unsafe situations. That is boundary.

Boundaries Jason Sets For Project Team

When Jason is project director or field director or general superintendent he has same boundaries for project team. Bathrooms have to be wonderful. Lunch areas have to be provided. That is boundary. Nobody is going to cross that boundary. We need to respond quickly to safety needs and to any other needs on project. There has to be clear plan for week and day that everyone can follow. We have to reduce variation and impacts with roadblocks daily. This site must always be clean and organized. Deliveries and material access has to be planned and enforced. Site has to be visually managed well for all workers and we have to make sure that everyone on site all trade partners succeed with owner.

Additional boundaries for project team: we need to process change orders in orderly fashion. Main workforce will continue working on contract work as we figure out changes. Workforce and trade partners all work collaboratively under GC’s direction. We do not have owner out there causing drama. Owner will be professional with project team and in meetings and not be abusive.

The Superintendent In Hawaii With Checklist On Door

Biggest reason supers get strung all over heck and back is because they do not have boundaries with their time. Superintendent in Hawaii sent Jason sign. He had sign on door saying: hey more than welcome to talk to you. You are always welcome. You are my team member. But whatever question you are going to give me have you already read drawings? Have you already looked at submittals? Have you already called your office? Have you coordinated with other trade partners? Have you exhausted all your resources? Just little cute little checklist to say: hey we should all do our own work.

At end of day trades need you as superintendent to be at helm steering ship. If you let trade partners make you answer all their RFIs run all your errands go to Home Depot solve all your problems go get all information interpret drawings all these things without them having to do it themselves then you are not at helm and everybody runs rampant.

With Jason’s time he time blocks his work. He has time to help throughout day but not always outside of those time blocks. Trades need to coordinate with other trades before talking to him. They need to research drawings before talking to him. They need to write their own RFIs. They need to research their own submittals. They need to call their own office. They need to go do research before wasting his time. Now if it is legitimate thing Jason wants everybody to feel open all time. But we have to have boundaries.

Boundaries Beyond Construction

Boundaries at home. Spouse cannot be abusive. Boundaries with children. You have to be here at 10:00. You are not going to ever look at pornography. You need to make sure that your computers are out in open spaces. We have boundaries at home. Boundaries at church. Boundaries with friends. You need to decide what your boundaries are.

It all comes down to this quote: success of any organization is determined by worst behavior that you or leader is willing to tolerate. If you do not have boundaries then you are tolerating everything and it is becoming culture and whatever culture you have will determine your success.

Signs You Need To Set Better Boundaries

Watch for these patterns that signal you are not setting proper boundaries and allowing chaos:

  • Trades interrupt you constantly throughout day with questions they should research themselves preventing you from being at helm steering ship creating firefighting mode instead of leadership mode
  • You spend entire day answering RFIs running errands going to Home Depot solving problems getting information interpreting drawings for trade partners who should do their own work leaving no time for roadblock removal or system improvement
  • Site stays dirty despite repeatedly asking trades to clean because you have not set boundary with consequences only verbal requests that get ignored creating culture where cleanliness is suggestion not standard
  • Deliveries show up unscheduled uncoordinated at wrong times blocking access ways creating chaos because you have not enforced boundary that all deliveries must be scheduled and approved in advance
  • Workers get forced to go fast to overcompensate for project failures creating unsafe conditions rework and defects because you have not set boundary protecting steady pace and proper planning
  • Trade partners skip huddles miss commitments do not prepare work come unprepared to meetings because you have not enforced boundaries with accountability through contractor grading or consequences

These are signs you are tolerating behaviors that destroy projects. And whatever worst behavior you tolerate becomes culture determining your success.

What Happens When You Do Not Set Boundaries

When boundaries are crossed and you allow people to do that you end up playing savior with people. If you let people treat you any kind of way. If you let people disrespect you. If you let people do that in your organization that is going to become culture. Culture is behaviors and beliefs of social group. If you let people cross boundaries that becomes culture.

Consider what happens on project without boundaries. Trade partner does not clean their area. You mention it verbally. They ignore you. You mention it again. They ignore you again. You eventually clean it yourself or have your laborers clean it. What have you taught them? That boundary does not exist. That they can ignore you. That someone else will do their work. And that becomes culture. Next trade sees first trade getting away with not cleaning. They stop cleaning too. Now entire site is dirty. And you spend all day trying to get people to clean instead of removing roadblocks and improving systems.

Or trade partner shows up unprepared to weekly work plan meeting. Has not coordinated with other trades. Has not researched drawings. Has not checked submittal status. Asks you questions during meeting that waste everyone’s time. You answer questions. You do research for them. You coordinate on their behalf. What have you taught them? That boundary does not exist. That they do not need to prepare. That you will do their work. And that becomes culture. Next week they show up unprepared again. Other trades see them getting away with it. They stop preparing too. Now entire meeting is waste of time with you doing everyone’s coordination work instead of making ready look-ahead and removing roadblocks.

Or foreman interrupts you constantly throughout day. Have you read drawings? No. Have you looked at submittals? No. Have you called your office? No. Have you coordinated with other trades? No. Have you exhausted all resources? No. But they want you to drop everything and answer their question immediately. You do it. What have you taught them? That boundary does not exist. That they do not need to do their own work. That you are available for interruption any time. And that becomes culture. They interrupt you more. Other foremen see them getting immediate response. They start interrupting too. Now you spend entire day answering questions that should never have been asked because people did not do basic research leaving you no time to be at helm steering ship.

This is why boundaries matter. Not because you are controlling or rigid or demanding. But because boundaries protect everyone from chaos that comes when standards do not exist.

The Contractor Grading Sheet As Formal Boundary System

Contractor grading sheet is literally just formal way of having boundaries. Instead of verbal requests that get ignored or emotional outbursts that manipulate people you have clear written standards that everyone knows and gets graded against creating accountability.

Is trade partner clean? Have they had to be reminded to be clean? Are they taking care of campus or neighbors? Do all crews have safety plans JHAs and pre-task plans for their daily work and turned in? Are foreman and workers on time for huddles? Are deliveries scheduled coordinated and on time? Are materials and manpower ready for commitments that week?

These questions define boundaries. And grading creates accountability. Trade partner who keeps site clean gets high grade. Trade partner who has to be reminded repeatedly gets low grade. Trade partner with low grade gets conversation about consequences. If they improve grade goes up. If they do not improve they get removed from project. No emotion. No drama. Just clear boundaries with clear consequences creating clear culture where everyone knows expectations and gets held accountable.

This is not mean. This is not controlling. This is respectful. Because clear is kind and unclear is unkind. When you set clear boundaries people know exactly what is expected. They can succeed or fail based on their own choices not based on whether you were in good mood or bad mood that day. They get treated consistently. They get graded objectively. They get opportunity to improve. And everyone benefits from culture where standards exist and get enforced.

The Most Important Boundary: Clean And Steady

One of most important boundaries which Jason mentions is clean and steady. We are not going to make workers go fast to overcompensate for failure in project. They will work at steady and reasonable and responsible and maybe little bit quick pace but they will not go fast and be forced to be put in unsafe situations. That is boundary.

This boundary protects workers from superintendent’s poor planning. If superintendent fails to remove roadblocks fails to coordinate trades fails to plan materials fails to create flow the natural response is to push workers. Go faster. Work overtime. Skip quality checks. Take safety shortcuts. Catch up from superintendent’s failures. And workers pay price with their bodies their families their safety.

Clean and steady boundary says: no. Workers will not pay for superintendent’s failures. We will work at steady pace. If we fall behind we will adjust schedule. We will add resources. We will change sequence. We will do whatever it takes to recover without overburdening workers. Because respect for people means protecting them from chaos created by poor systems.

This is hardest boundary to hold because superintendent feels pressure from owner from executives from schedule from budget. Easiest path is to push workers. Hardest path is to hold boundary protecting steady pace and fix systems instead. But hardest path is right path. Because workers are people not machines. And boundaries exist to protect people from chaos.

The Challenge

Stop using emotional responses to manipulate people and assert control when disappointed by their behavior. Start setting clear boundaries with dispassionate enforcement: expect nothing from people but appreciate their best and still do right thing according to standards. Stop tolerating behaviors that destroy projects thinking verbal requests or occasional outbursts will create change. Start implementing contractor grading sheet as formal boundary system with clear standards clear grading clear consequences creating accountability. Stop letting trade partners waste your time with questions they should research themselves preventing you from being at helm steering ship. Start setting boundary: coordinate with other trades research drawings write your own RFIs research your own submittals call your own office exhaust all resources before asking superintendent. Stop making workers go fast to overcompensate for your failure to remove roadblocks coordinate trades plan materials create flow. Start holding clean and steady boundary: workers will work at steady reasonable responsible pace even if that means adjusting schedule adding resources changing sequence to recover without overburdening people.

As the principle teaches: success of any organization is determined by worst behavior that you or leader is willing to tolerate. If you do not have boundaries you are tolerating everything. That becomes culture. That culture determines your success. So set boundaries. For trade partners: keep site clean and organized be safe complete daily reports do basic legal requirements. For project team: bathrooms wonderful lunch areas provided respond quickly to safety needs clear plan for week and day reduce variation with roadblocks daily site always clean and organized deliveries planned and enforced visually managed well all trade partners succeed with owner process change orders in orderly fashion workforce continues working on contract work while figuring out changes workforce works collaboratively under GC direction owner professional not abusive. 

For your time: time block your work trades coordinate with other trades before talking to you research drawings before talking to you write their own RFIs research their own submittals call their own office do research before wasting your time. And most important: clean and steady workers will not go fast to overcompensate for failure in project they will work at steady reasonable responsible pace because respect for people means protecting them from chaos created by poor systems. Boundaries are not controlling. Boundaries are protective. They protect you from being savior running around fixing everyone’s problems instead of leading project. They protect trades from unclear expectations that change based on your mood. They protect workers from being overburdened by poor planning. Set boundaries. Enforce boundaries. Create culture where standards exist. And watch everyone rise to occasion becoming a players. On we go.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is difference between setting boundaries and being controlling?
Boundaries are clear standards enforced dispassionately (expect nothing from people but appreciate their best and still do right thing according to standards), while controlling uses emotional responses to manipulate people and assert control, boundaries protect everyone from chaos while controlling protects ego.

How do I enforce boundaries without getting angry or emotional?
Stop expecting things from people which causes disappointment leading to emotional manipulation, instead set clear standards appreciate people’s best and do right thing dispassionately, if boundary crossed adjust process adjust situation remove person from project but no emotion just clear consequences.

What boundaries should superintendent set with trade partners?
Keep site clean and organized, be safe according to orientation and OSHA training, complete daily reports and basic legal requirements, have safety plans JHAs and PTPs for daily work, be on time for huddles, schedule coordinate and execute deliveries on time, have materials and manpower ready for commitments, contractor grading sheet makes these formal.

How do I set boundaries with my time without seeming unavailable?
Time block your work with dedicated help times throughout day, require trades to coordinate with other trades research drawings write their own RFIs research their own submittals call their own office exhaust all resources before asking you, checklist on door: have you done these things before interrupting me?

What is clean and steady boundary and why does it matter?
Workers will not go fast to overcompensate for failure in project they will work at steady reasonable responsible pace even if means adjusting schedule adding resources changing sequence, this boundary protects workers from paying for superintendent’s poor planning with their bodies families and safety proving respect for people.


If you want to learn more we have:

-Takt Virtual Training: (Click here)
-Check out our Youtube channel for more info: (Click here) 
-Listen to the Elevate Construction podcast: (Click here) 
-Check out our training programs and certifications: (Click here)
-The Takt Book: (Click here)

Discover Jason’s Expertise:

Meet Jason Schroeder, the driving force behind Elevate Construction IST. As the company’s owner and principal consultant, he’s dedicated to taking construction to new heights. With a wealth of industry experience, he’s crafted the Field Engineer Boot Camp and Superintendent Boot Camp – intensive training programs engineered to cultivate top-tier leaders capable of steering their teams towards success. Jason’s vision? To expand his training initiatives across the nation, empowering construction firms to soar to unprecedented levels of excellence.

On we go

    Related Books

    The First Planner System: The Project Planning System for Executives, Project Managers, and Superintendents in Pre-construction - Book 2
    Get Book
    Pull Planning For Builders: How to Pull Plan Right, Respect People, and Gain Time (The Art of the Builder)
    Get Book
    The Ten Improvements to Production Planning: What Lean Builders Can Do To Improve Short Interval Planning (The Art of the Builder)
    Get Book

    Related Books

    The First Planner System: The Project Planning System for Executives, Project Managers, and Superintendents in Pre-construction - Book 2
    Get Book
    Built to Fail: Why Construction Projects Take So Long, Cost Too Much, And How to Fix It
    Get Book

    Related Books

    The First Planner System: The Project Planning System for Executives, Project Managers, and Superintendents in Pre-construction - Book 2
    Get Book
    The 10 Myths of CPM: How The Critical Path Method Systematizes Disrespect for People
    Get Book
    Calumet "K"
    Get Book

    faq

    General Training Overview

    What construction leadership training programs does LeanTakt offer?
    LeanTakt offers Superintendent/PM Boot Camps, Virtual Takt Production System® Training, Onsite Takt Simulations, and Foreman & Field Engineer Training. Each program is tailored to different leadership levels in construction.
    Who should attend LeanTakt’s training programs?
    Superintendents, Project Managers, Foremen, Field Engineers, and trade partners who want to improve planning, communication, and execution on projects.
    How do these training programs improve project performance?
    They provide proven Lean and Takt systems that reduce chaos, improve reliability, strengthen collaboration, and accelerate project delivery.
    What makes LeanTakt’s training different from other construction courses?
    Our programs are hands-on, field-tested, and focused on practical application—not just classroom theory.
    Do I need prior Lean or takt planning experience to attend?
    No. Our programs cover foundational principles before moving into advanced applications.
    How quickly can I apply what I learn on real projects?
    Most participants begin applying new skills immediately, often the same week they complete the program.
    Are these trainings designed for both office and field leaders?
    Yes. We equip both project managers and superintendents with tools that connect field and office operations.
    What industries benefit most from LeanTakt training?
    Commercial, multifamily, residential, industrial, and infrastructure projects all benefit from flow-based planning.
    Do participants receive certificates after completing training?
    Yes. Every participant receives a LeanTakt Certificate of Completion.
    Is LeanTakt training recognized in the construction industry?
    Yes. Our programs are widely respected among leading GCs, subcontractors, and construction professionals.

    Superintendent / PM Boot Camp

    What is the Superintendent & Project Manager Boot Camp?
    It’s a 5-day immersive training for superintendents and PMs to master Lean leadership, takt planning, and project flow.
    How long does the Superintendent/PM Boot Camp last?
    Five full days of hands-on training.
    What topics are covered in the Boot Camp curriculum?
    Lean leadership, Takt Planning, logistics, daily planning, field-office communication, and team health.
    How does the Boot Camp improve leadership and scheduling skills?
    Yes. You’ll learn how to run day huddles, team meetings, worker huddles, and Lean coordination processes.
    Who is the Boot Camp best suited for?
    Construction leaders responsible for delivering projects, including Superintendents, PMs, and Field Leaders.
    What real-world challenges are simulated during the Boot Camp?
    Schedule breakdowns, trade conflicts, logistics issues, and communication gaps.
    Will I learn Takt Planning at the Boot Camp?
    Yes. Takt Planning is a core focus of the Boot Camp.
    How does this Boot Camp compare to traditional PM certification?
    It’s practical and execution-based rather than exam-based. You learn by doing, not just studying theory.
    Can my entire project team attend the Boot Camp together?
    Yes. Teams attending together often see the greatest results.
    What kind of real-world challenges do we simulate?
    Improved project flow, fewer delays, better team communication, and stronger leadership confidence.

    Takt Production System® Virtual Training

    What is the Virtual Takt Production System® Training?
    It’s an expert-led online program that teaches Lean construction teams how to implement takt planning.
    How does virtual takt training work?
    Delivered online via live sessions, interactive discussions, and digital tools.
    What are the benefits of online takt planning training?
    Convenience, global accessibility, real-time learning, and immediate application.
    Can I access the virtual training from anywhere?
    Yes. It’s fully web-based and accessible worldwide.
    Can I access the virtual training from anywhere?
    Yes. It’s fully web-based and accessible worldwide.
    What skills will I gain from the Virtual TPS® Training?
    Macro and micro Takt planning, weekly updates, flow management, and CPM integration.
    How long does the virtual training program take?
    The program is typically completed in multiple live sessions across several days.
    Can I watch recordings if I miss a session?
    Yes. Recordings are available to all participants.
    Do you offer group access or company licenses for the virtual training?
    Yes. Teams and companies can enroll together at discounted rates.
    How does the Virtual TPS® Training integrate with CPM tools?
    We show how to align Takt with CPM schedules like Primavera P6 or MS Project.

    Onsite Takt Simulation

    What is a Takt Simulation in construction training?
    It’s a live, interactive workshop that demonstrates takt planning on-site.
    How does the Takt Simulation workshop work?
    Teams participate in hands-on exercises to learn the flow and rhythm of a Takt-based project.
    Can I choose between a 1-day or 2-day Takt Simulation?
    Yes. We offer flexible formats to fit your team’s schedule and needs.
    Who should participate in the Takt Simulation workshop?
    Superintendents, PMs, site supervisors, contractors, and engineers.
    How does a Takt Simulation improve project planning?
    It shows teams how to structure zones, manage flow, and coordinate trades in real time.
    What will my team learn from the onsite simulation?
    How to build and maintain takt plans, manage buffers, and align trade partners.
    Is the simulation tailored to my specific project type?
    Yes. Scenarios can be customized to match your project.
    How do Takt Simulations improve trade partner coordination?
    They strengthen collaboration by making handoffs visible and predictable.
    What results can I expect from an onsite Takt Simulation?
    Improved schedule reliability, better trade collaboration, and reduced rework.
    How many people can join a Takt Simulation session?
    Group sizes are flexible, but typically 15–30 participants per session.

    Foreman & Field Engineer Training

    What is Foreman & Field Engineer Training?
    It’s an on-demand, practical program that equips foremen and engineers with leadership and planning skills.
    How does this training prepare emerging leaders?
    By teaching communication, crew management, and execution strategies.
    Is the training on-demand or scheduled?
    On-demand, tailored to your team’s timing and needs.
    What skills do foremen and engineers gain from this training?
    Planning, safety leadership, coordination, and communication.
    How does the training improve communication between field and office?
    It builds shared systems that align superintendents, engineers, and managers.
    Can the training be customized for my team’s needs?
    Yes. Programs are tailored for your project or company.
    What makes this program different from generic leadership courses?
    It’s construction-specific, field-tested, and focused on real project application.
    How do foremen and field engineers apply this training immediately?
    They can use new systems for planning, coordination, and daily crew management right away.
    Is the training suitable for small construction companies?
    Yes. Small and large teams alike benefit from building flow-based leadership skills.

    Testimonials

    Testimonials

    "The bootcamp I was apart of was amazing. Its was great while it was happening but also had a very profound long-term motivation that is still pushing me to do more, be more. It sounds a little strange to say that a construction bootcamp changed my life, but it has. It has opened my eyes to many possibilities on how a project can be successfully run. It’s also provided some very positive ideas on how people can and should be treated in construction.

    I am a hungry person by nature, so it doesn’t take a lot to get to participate. I loved the way it was not just about participating, it was also about doing it with conviction, passion, humility and if it wasn’t portrayed that way you had to do it again."

    "It's great to be a part of a company that has similar values to my own, especially regarding how we treat our trade partners. The idea of "you gotta make them feel worse to make them do better" has been preached at me for years. I struggled with this as you will not find a single psychology textbook stating these beliefs. In fact it is quite the opposite, and causing conflict is a recipe for disaster. I'm still honestly in shock I have found a company that has based its values on scientific facts based on human nature. That along with the Takt scheduling system makes everything even better. I am happy to be a part of a change that has been long overdue in our industry!"

    "Wicked team building, so valuable for the forehumans of the sub trades to know the how and why. Great tools and resources. Even though I am involved and use the tools every day, I feel like everything is fresh and at the forefront to use"

    "Jason and his team did an incredible job passing on the overall theory of what they do. After 3 days of running through the course I cannot see any holes in their concept. It works. it's proven to work and I am on board!"

    "Loved the pull planning, Takt planning, and logistic model planning. Well thought out and professional"

    "The Super/PM Boot Camp was an excellent experience that furthered my understanding of Lean Practices. The collaboration, group involvement, passion about real project site experiences, and POSITIVE ENERGY. There are no dull moments when you head into this training. Jason and Mr. Montero were always on point and available to help in the break outs sessions. Easily approachable to talk too during breaks and YES, it was fun. I recommend this training for any PM or Superintendent that wants to further their career."

    agenda

    Day 1

    Foundations & Macro Planning

    • Introduction to Takt Production System® principles
    • CPM vs TAKT comparison
    • Macro planning, zoning, and density analysis
    • Quantities and production rates
    • Hands-on application to participants’ projects with LeanTakt PM experts

    day2

    Norm Planning & Flow Optimization

    • Review and refinement of Day 1 work
    • Pull planning and sequence optimization
    • Work packaging for balanced flow
    • Project integration session with LeanTakt PM coaching

    day3

    Advanced Tools & Comparisons

    • Macro work packaging and example walkthrough
    • Calculator Norm for production optimization
    • Stacking comparison to avoid trade conflicts
    • Hands-on application to participants’ own schedules

    day4

    Buffers, Controls & Finalization

    • Review of Day 3 implementation
    • Buffer management strategies and placement
    • Takt control principles and steering methods
    • Project plan finalization with expert guidance

    day5

    Control Systems & Presentations

    • Takt steering, control systems, and real project examples
    • Participant project presentations with LeanTakt PM feedback
    • Wrap-up, feedback, and action planning for post-training implementation

    faq

    UNDERSTANDING THE TRAINING

    What is the Virtual Takt Production System® Training by LeanTakt?
    It’s an expert-led online program designed to teach construction professionals how to implement Takt Planning to create flow, eliminate chaos, and align teams across the project lifecycle.
    Who should take the LeanTakt virtual training?
    This training is ideal for Superintendents, Project Managers, Engineers, Schedulers, Trade Partners, and Lean Champions looking to improve planning and execution.
    What topics are covered in the online Takt Production System® course?
    The course covers macro and micro Takt planning, zone creation, buffers, weekly updates, flow management, trade coordination, and integration with CPM tools.
    What makes LeanTakt’s virtual training different from other Lean construction courses?
    Unlike theory-based courses, this training is hands-on, practical, field-tested, and includes live coaching tailored to your actual projects.
    Do I get a certificate after completing the online training?
    Yes. Upon successful completion, participants receive a LeanTakt Certificate of Completion, which validates your knowledge and readiness to implement Takt.

    VALUE AND RESULTS

    What are the benefits of Takt Production System® training for my team?
    It helps teams eliminate bottlenecks, improve planning reliability, align trades, and reduce the chaos typically seen in traditional construction schedules.
    How much time and money can I save with Takt Planning?
    Many projects using Takt see 15–30% reductions in time and cost due to better coordination, fewer delays, and increased team accountability.
    What’s the ROI of virtual Takt training for construction teams?
    The ROI comes from faster project delivery, reduced rework, improved communication, and better resource utilization — often 10x the investment.
    Will this training reduce project delays or rework?
    Yes. By visualizing flow and aligning trades, Takt Planning reduces miscommunication and late handoffs — major causes of delay and rework.
    How soon can I expect to see results on my projects?
    Most teams report seeing improvement in coordination and productivity within the first 2–4 weeks of implementation.

    PLANNING AND SCHEDULING TOPICS

    What is Takt Planning and how is it used in construction?
    Takt Planning is a Lean scheduling method that creates flow by aligning work with time and space, using rhythm-based planning to coordinate teams and reduce waste.
    What’s the difference between macro and micro Takt plans?
    Macro Takt plans focus on the overall project flow and phase durations, while micro Takt plans break down detailed weekly tasks by zone and crew.
    Will I learn how to build a complete Takt plan from scratch?
    Yes. The training teaches you how to build both macro and micro Takt plans tailored to your project, including workflows, buffers, and sequencing.
    How do I update and maintain a Takt schedule each week?
    You’ll learn how to conduct weekly updates using lookaheads, trade feedback, zone progress, and digital tools to maintain schedule reliability.
    Can I integrate Takt Planning with CPM or Primavera P6?
    Yes. The training includes guidance on aligning Takt plans with CPM logic, showing how both systems can work together effectively.
    Will I have access to the instructors during the training?
    Yes. You’ll have opportunities to ask questions, share challenges, and get real-time feedback from LeanTakt coaches.
    Can I ask questions specific to my current project?
    Absolutely. In fact, we encourage it — the training is designed to help you apply Takt to your active jobs.
    Is support available after the training ends?
    Yes. You can access follow-up support, coaching, and community forums to help reinforce implementation.
    Can your tools be customized to my project or team?
    Yes. We offer customizable templates and implementation options to fit different project types, teams, and tech stacks.
    When is the best time in a project lifecycle to take this training?
    Ideally before or during preconstruction, but teams have seen success implementing it mid-project as well.

    APPLICATION & TEAM ADOPTION

    What changes does my team need to adopt Takt Planning?
    Teams must shift from reactive scheduling to proactive, flow-based planning with clear commitments, reliable handoffs, and a visual management mindset.
    Do I need any prior Lean or scheduling experience?
    No prior Lean experience is required. The course is structured to take you from foundational principles to advanced application.
    How long does it take for teams to adapt to Takt Planning?
    Most teams adapt within 2–6 weeks, depending on project size and how fully the system is adopted across roles.
    Can this training work for smaller companies or projects?
    Absolutely. Takt is scalable and especially powerful for small teams seeking better structure and predictability.
    What role do trade partners play in using Takt successfully?
    Trade partners are key collaborators. They help shape realistic flow, manage buffers, and provide feedback during weekly updates.

    VIRTUAL FORMAT & ACCESSIBILITY

    Can I access the virtual training from anywhere?
    Yes. The training is fully accessible online, making it ideal for distributed teams across regions or countries.
    Is this training available internationally?
    Yes. LeanTakt trains teams around the world and supports global implementations.
    Can I watch recordings if I miss a session?
    Yes. All sessions are recorded and made available for later viewing through your training portal.
    Do you offer group access or company licenses?
    Yes. Teams can enroll together at discounted rates, and we offer licenses for enterprise rollouts.
    What technology or setup do I need to join the virtual training?
    A reliable internet connection, webcam, Miro, Spreadsheets, and access to Zoom.

    faq

    GENERAL FAQS

    What is the Superintendent / PM Boot Camp?
    It’s a hands-on leadership training for Superintendents and Project Managers in the construction industry focused on Lean systems, planning, and communication.
    Who is this Boot Camp for?
    Construction professionals including Superintendents, Project Managers, Field Engineers, and Foremen looking to improve planning, leadership, and project flow.
    What makes this construction boot camp different?
    Real-world project simulations, expert coaching, Lean principles, team-based learning, and post-camp support — all built for field leaders.
    Is this just a seminar or classroom training?
    No. It’s a hands-on, immersive experience. You’ll plan, simulate, collaborate, and get feedback — not sit through lectures.
    What is the focus of the training?
    Leadership, project planning, communication, Lean systems, and integrating office-field coordination.

    CURRICULUM & OUTCOMES

    What topics are covered in the Boot Camp?
    Takt planning, day planning, logistics, pre-construction, team health, communication systems, and more.
    What is Takt Planning and why is it taught?
    Takt is a Lean planning method that creates flow and removes chaos. It helps teams deliver projects on time with less stress.
    Will I learn how to lead field teams more effectively?
    Yes. This boot camp focuses on real leadership challenges and gives you systems and strategies to lead high-performing teams.
    Do you cover daily huddles and meeting systems?
    Yes. You’ll learn how to run day huddles, team meetings, worker huddles, and Lean coordination processes.
    What kind of real-world challenges do we simulate?
    You’ll work through real project schedules, logistical constraints, leadership decisions, and field-office communication breakdowns.

    LOGISTICS & FORMAT

    Is the training in-person or virtual?
    It’s 100% in-person to maximize learning, feedback, and team-based interaction.
    How long is the Boot Camp?
    It runs for 5 full days.
    Where is the Boot Camp held?
    Locations vary — typically hosted in a professional training center or project setting. Contact us for the next available city/date.
    Do you offer follow-up coaching after the Boot Camp?
    Yes. Post-camp support is included so you can apply what you’ve learned on your projects.
    Can I ask questions about my actual project?
    Absolutely. That’s encouraged — bring your current challenges.

    PRICING & VALUE

    How much does the Boot Camp cost?
    $5,000 per person.
    Are there any group discounts?
    Yes — get 10% off when 4 or more people from the same company attend.
    What’s the ROI for sending my team?
    Better planning = fewer delays, smoother coordination, and higher team morale — all of which boost productivity and reduce costs.
    Will I see results immediately?
    Most participants apply what they’ve learned as soon as they return to the jobsite — especially with follow-up support.
    Can this replace other leadership training?
    In many cases, yes. This Boot Camp is tailored to construction professionals, unlike generic leadership seminars.

    SEO-BASED / HIGH-INTENT SEARCH QUESTIONS

    What is the best leadership training for construction Superintendents?
    Our Boot Camp offers real-world, field-focused leadership training tailored for construction leaders.
    What’s included in a Superintendent Boot Camp?
    Takt planning, day planning, logistics, pre-construction systems, huddles, simulations, and more.
    Where can I find Lean construction training near me?
    Check our upcoming in-person sessions or request a private boot camp in your city.
    How can I improve field and office communication on a project?
    This Boot Camp teaches you tools and systems to connect field and office workflows seamlessly.
    Is there a training to help reduce chaos on construction sites?
    Yes — this program is built specifically to turn project chaos into flow through structured leadership.