← Back to list
// Case #05
Flashing after cladding: double work and a cracked panel
01Situation
Metal flashing of parapets and cornices scheduled after cladding instead of before or during. To complete it, tools had to be operated at high heights, partially dismantling the finished cladding. During this, a cladding panel was damaged — replacement ~1,500–2,000 NOK plus labor.
02Where Margin Escaped
Two independent leaks on one detail. First: sequence — dismantling and reassembling finished cladding, i.e., work done twice. Second: damage — cost of panel and labor, which 'disappears' if nobody attributes it to the responsible party and item.
03Root Cause
Work sequence (flashing vs cladding) not established at entry. Damage cost with no place to book with accountability.
!How we aim to close it
Sequence would be a scope field, and damage would be registered within seconds: photo, amount, item, responsible party. Today Desk accepts a ticket with photos and an assigned responsible person; amount and cost item do not exist yet.
Read Next Story
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.
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.