Case Studies

Where the margin escapes

Margin on site is rarely lost in pricing or by crew. It is lost in the gap between decision and execution — when info arrives after the work is done, not before. This is a series of short, real stories showing how it looks and what it costs.

Methodological note: Real, anonymized cases. Sample amounts — apply your own project rates.

// Case #01
The strip that covered five days of work
~4,800 PLN · 3 people × 5 days × 8 h × 40 PLN/h (example)
Three days of work to rework due to unspecified tolerance. Then two days of precise work — covered by a strip.
Read story →
// Case #02
“I said” ≠ “He understood”
Most leaks in this series are results of a single gap: nobody confirms that the message went through.
Read story →
// Case #03
Boards with no safety data sheet
~18,000 PLN · 120 PLN/h × 37.5 h × 4 weeks (agency cover, example)
A worker was told to strip out 'wood-based boards'. They were bituminous — dust that irritates the airways. A week without a mask, because nobody attached the safety data sheet to the task. A month of sick leave. The bill for one missing sheet of paper: ~18,000 PLN. Preventing it cost a mask worth a few tens of złoty.
Read story →
// Case #04
Drainage that wasn't in the takeoff
Detail existed in the prefab documentation. Did not enter the takeoff. Collision emerged when framing was already calculated.
Read story →
// Case #05
Flashing after cladding: double work and a cracked panel
Poor sequencing means work is done twice. And damage without attribution dissolves into 'overhead costs'.
Read story →
// Case #06
The day that cost two days
An assignment described in one sentence: 'stones to lay on the roof'. Three people knew what that roof was coated with. None of them tied it to who was going up there. One sentence didn't travel — and one day cost two.
Read story →
// Case #07
Five minutes of explaining instead of thirty seconds of sketch
Words are a worse medium for geometry than a sketch. And misunderstanding means rework — later and more expensive.
Read story →
// Case #08
Overlapping tapes — but which way?
Ambiguous waterproofing detail is a defect that emerges after laying the cladding. In the most expensive possible moment.
Read story →
// Case #09
The membrane that everyone walked on
Work was done well. Then nobody protected it — and it stopped being done well.
Read story →
// Case #010
Ten centimetres too high
~3,840 PLN · 4 man-days × 8 h × 120 PLN/h (Norwegian rate, sample)
Nobody checked what height the annex foundation should sit at. The whole rest of the building was already a consequence of it — including a hole in the roof, cut in the wrong place.
Read story →

Common Denominator

“How many times has the crew done a solid job — and then a decision from above invalidated it because info wasn't integrated in time? Count those days. That's the margin you lose without knowing where.”

From the Founder

These are not textbook stories

Every single one of these cases actually happened — on sites in Bergen and Garwolin. I didn't gather them from textbook, but from my own work.

Every time, margin didn't leak in the pricing or crew hands — but in the gap between decision and execution. Information or decision arrived after the work, not before. The cost trickled down to the contractor.

That's why I'm building CAVOR: so that constraints — tolerances, details, design changes — are tied to the scope and visible to the crew before they start working. Not after.