Getting Supers bought in – Part 3

Build a Culture Where Trade Partners Win and Superintendents Lead Real Collaboration

If your trade partners are struggling, your project is already in trouble, even if the schedule says you’re fine. You might not feel it today, but you will feel it later when the manpower spikes, the quality starts slipping, the foremen stop bringing you solutions, and every meeting turns into damage control. The brutal truth is that a general contractor cannot be successful unless the trades are successful as well. That is not a motivational poster line. That is a business law, and projects violate it at their own expense.

The hard part is that most leaders already believe this. They say it in kickoff meetings. They put “partnering” on slides. They talk about collaboration. And then the job starts, pressure shows up, and the system quietly rewards the opposite behavior. The trade partners get pushed, corners get cut, schedules get weaponized, and the superintendent ends up policing the site instead of leading it. Then we wonder why the trades aren’t bought in, why the field is combative, and why the best subcontractors stop bidding our work.

This is not a “bad people” problem. This is a system problem. And it is fixable.

When the Site Feels Like a Battlefield

When collaboration breaks down, you can feel it in the air. The trailer gets tense. Conversations happen in hallways instead of in meetings. Trade partners stop raising issues early because experience has taught them they will get punished for honesty. The foremen protect themselves, the project team protects themselves, and everybody starts acting like they are on different teams.

At that point, even simple work becomes hard. The job turns into constant chasing, constant expediting, constant firefighting. It looks like “being busy,” but it is actually the absence of flow. It drains people at home, it increases risk, and it kills performance. Nobody wins in that environment, and it certainly does not create a remarkable construction experience.

Here is the failure pattern I see most often: leaders want trade partner success, but they manage through control instead of collaboration. They want total participation, but they create partial participation. They want alignment, but they build silos. Then they ask a superintendent to “make the trades successful” without giving them the systems to do it.

That is like putting someone in a car, taking away the steering wheel, and demanding they drive better.

Why Supers Get Hardened and Trades Get Defensive

If you are a superintendent reading this, I know what it feels like when the project is heavy and the expectations are high. You are responsible for safety, quality, schedule, logistics, and the day-to-day friction that nobody else sees. You get blamed when things go wrong, and you often do not get the credit when things go right. If you have been burned by trade partners who overpromised, underdelivered, or hid problems, it makes sense that you would protect yourself.

If you are a trade partner reading this, I know what it feels like to walk onto a site where the plan is unclear, the sequence changes daily, and the general contractor’s systems create waste that you are expected to absorb. It is hard to be collaborative when you are losing money and being treated like the problem.

Both sides are reacting to the same thing: instability. And instability is not a personality issue. It is a planning and leadership issue.

When “Winning” Was Actually Losing

I learned this lesson the hard way early in my career. I was on a project where a trade partner got hit with a problem that, if I’m being honest, the system helped create. Work moved too fast, conditions changed, and instead of partnering to solve it, we turned it into a paperwork battle. We documented, we backcharged, we pushed, and we treated it like winning.

Looking back, it was not winning. It was short-term control that created long-term damage. It hurt relationships, it created fear, and it reinforced the idea that the general contractor’s job is to take instead of give. I had to grow up and admit that I was acting inside a broken system and then contributing to that brokenness.

That experience changed me. I do not call them “subcontractors” anymore in the way most people mean it. I call them trade partners because that is what they are. If they fail, we fail. If they succeed, we can build something remarkable together.

Trade Partner Success Is the True Definition of Project Success

A project is not successful because it finished on time. Schedule matters, but schedule is not a crown you wear while everyone else suffers. Real success has multiple equal outcomes happening at once. A successful project has flow, stable production, excellent quality, perfect safety, and trade partners who are profitable and willing to work with you again.

If you are finishing jobs while your trade partners are bleeding, you are not building a strong business. You are burning your supply chain. Eventually, you will get the bidders who can afford the pain, and those are not the trade partners you want.

That is why collaboration is not a soft skill. Collaboration is operational strategy.

Total Participation, Flow, and Cultural Systems

When companies ask me how to get superintendents to care about trade partners, I do not start with a speech. I start with systems that make caring inevitable.

The first system is total participation. If you want people to care, they must weigh in. They must buy in. They must help build the plan. This applies to the superintendent, the project manager, and the trade partners. When planning is done to people instead of with people, collaboration dies.

The second system is flow. Trade partners do not make money in chaos. They make money in predictable sequence, reliable handoffs, and stable work fronts. This is where LeanTakt comes in. When you implement LeanTakt correctly, you create a rhythm on the project that protects trade partner productivity, reduces waste, and stabilizes manpower. Trades can plan. Foremen can lead. Crews can execute. The job stops feeling like a daily emergency.

The third system is culture that is visible and enforced. Culture is not what you say. Culture is what your meeting habits, office setup, and decision-making patterns reward. If your environment creates silos, you will get silo behavior. If your environment creates proximity and shared problem solving, you will get collaboration.

This is why organizational health matters. It is also why leadership development matters. You do not scale excellence by hoping. You scale it by installing human systems.

How to Make Trade Partner Success Real on Your Jobs

Start by changing how you plan. If your schedule is created in isolation and then “communicated” to trades, you are already behind. The trades need to help build the plan, understand the sequence, and commit to the work in a way that is measurable and respected. Whether you implement LeanTakt, the Last Planner System, or a blended approach, the goal is the same: create a stable production system that protects flow.

Then change how your team works together in the trailer. Silos form when people hide in offices, avoid hard conversations, and operate in separate worlds. Proximity matters. When a project manager and superintendent are disconnected, trade partners pay the price. When they operate as equal partners, aligned and consistent, the site stabilizes.

If your project needs superintendent coaching, project support, or leadership development, Elevate Construction can help your field teams stabilize, schedule, and flow.

That help is not theoretical. It is practical. It looks like installing huddle systems that drive alignment, training leaders to actively listen and facilitate commitment-based planning, and coaching teams to run projects with reliability instead of adrenaline.

There are also two simple mechanisms that can create immediate traction without turning your project into a checklist.

One is intentional cross-pollination. Trades should understand the pressures and responsibilities of the general contractor team, and the office should understand what it actually takes to execute in the field. When people see each other clearly, respect rises and assumptions fade.

The other is feedback that is structured and safe. If you want collaboration, you need a way for trade partners to tell you the truth without fear. A simple weekly grading or feedback loop can be powerful if it is used to improve, not punish. When feedback becomes part of the system, problems show up early, and early is where problems are cheapest.

A small, natural set of actions that leaders can implement quickly looks like this:

• Create a routine where trade partners give structured feedback to the GC team weekly, and the GC team gives structured feedback back, with a focus on flow, readiness, and reliability rather than blame.
• Make planning commitments visible so that promises are tracked, learning happens, and reliability becomes normal.

Those are not the full framework. They are just practical levers that support what should already be happening in your paragraphs of planning, teaming, and leadership.

Protecting People Through Better Systems

Respect for people is not letting bad behavior linger. Respect for people is creating clarity, expectations, and systems where people can win. If a superintendent is expected to protect the site, secure the building, and set trade partners up for success, then the system must support it. The plan must be visible. Coverage must be built. Roles must be clear. Teams must be aligned.

When those systems exist and someone still refuses to participate, that is no longer a training gap. That is a values gap. In those cases, accountability is kindness to everyone else. Culture cannot survive if it tolerates behaviors that harm the team.

The end goal is not punishment. The end goal is stability. The end goal is flow. The end goal is a job where people go home proud, trade partners are profitable, and the owner gets a remarkable experience.

That is what Elevate Construction stands for.

Bring It Back to the Mission

We are trying to elevate the entire construction experience. That means the workers, the foremen, the superintendents, the project managers, the executives, and the trade partners. It means building systems where projects are safe, clean, predictable, and profitable for everyone involved.

Trade partner collaboration is not an extra. It is the backbone. If the trades are winning, the project is winning. If the trades are losing, the project is borrowing time until it collapses.

Here is your challenge: pick one project right now and decide that trade partner success will be measured, protected, and improved through real systems, not speeches. Get your team aligned. Install flow. Demand total participation. Then watch how quickly the job starts to feel different.

As W. Edwards Deming said, “A bad system will beat a good person every time.” Build the system, and you will be amazed how many good people show up.

FAQ

How do I get superintendents to respect and support trade partners consistently?
Build systems that reward collaboration and flow. When superintendents and project teams plan with trades, protect reliable sequence through LeanTakt, and create safe feedback loops, caring becomes the normal behavior instead of a personality requirement.

What is LeanTakt and why does it help trade partners make money?
LeanTakt creates predictable work flow through zones and sequence so trades can plan manpower, reduce waiting, and avoid stacking crews. Stable flow reduces waste and increases profitability because production becomes reliable instead of reactive.

How can a GC reduce the office-versus-field mentality that hurts collaboration?
Create proximity, shared decision-making, and equal partnership between the superintendent and project manager. When planning, buyout, and execution are handled as a team, the field and office stop competing and start leading together.

Should trade partners grade the GC team or provide weekly feedback?
Yes, if it is used to improve rather than punish. Structured feedback surfaces problems early, builds trust, and reinforces the behaviors that create reliability. The key is acting on it visibly so people know honesty is safe.

When does accountability become necessary instead of more training?
When expectations are clear, systems are in place, and someone still refuses to participate or repeatedly harms the team. At that point it is not a skill gap. It is a values gap, and protecting the culture is respect for everyone else.