By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group. 

Developing supervisors from within remains one of the strongest ways to build a roofing company, but the transition must be managed deliberately. 

Many roofing contractors promote their best operatives into supervisory roles for understandable reasons. They know the work, understand the materials, have earned the respect of the team and can identify poor workmanship quickly. Those qualities matter, but they do not automatically prepare someone to lead a project. 

The responsibilities of a skilled roofer and an effective supervisor overlap, but they are not the same. A skilled roofer proves what they can do. A supervisor must enable the whole team to perform. That requires more than technical ability. The supervisor must plan the work, organise people, communicate with the office, coordinate with others on site, maintain records, protect quality and help the team respond when conditions change. 

When contractors promote strong operatives without preparing them for those additional responsibilities, they place good people in difficult positions. The new supervisor may continue thinking like the most experienced person on the tools while the project needs someone to manage the entire site operation. The result can be frustration for the supervisor, confusion for the team and reduced control for the business. Developing supervisors from within remains one of the strongest ways to build a roofing company, but the transition must be managed deliberately. 

Technical skill is the foundation, not the complete role 

A supervisor needs technical credibility. The site team must believe that the person leading them understands the roofing system, installation sequence, quality requirements and practical challenges of the work. Without that credibility, leadership becomes difficult. 

However, technical knowledge is only the foundation. The supervisor must also understand what needs to happen before installation begins, what information the team requires, how labour should be organised and which issues need to be reported before they affect cost or programme. 

An experienced roofer may know exactly how to complete a difficult detail. A supervisor must make sure the entire team understands the detail, has the correct materials and completes it consistently. An experienced roofer may recognise that access is poor. A supervisor must assess how that access will affect productivity, raise the issue and help develop a workable plan. An experienced roofer may see that another trade is causing disruption. A supervisor must record the effect, communicate it to the project manager and protect the team’s ability to continue productive work. 

The role moves from completing tasks personally to creating the conditions in which other people can complete them successfully. That change is not always easy. 

The best operative cannot continue doing everything 

New supervisors often struggle because they remain too involved in the physical work. They may believe they are helping the team by completing the most difficult tasks themselves, correcting every detail personally or stepping in whenever production slows. In the short term, that can appear productive. In the longer term, it creates a problem. 

While the supervisor is focused on one area, no one may be looking ahead. Materials may not be ready, the next workface may not be released, a delivery may arrive without a plan, quality checks may happen too late or an instruction may not be recorded. The supervisor’s value is no longer measured only by how much work they complete personally. It is measured by how well the entire team performs. 

That requires stepping back from some tasks and paying attention to the wider project. The strongest supervisors still support the team when necessary, but they do not allow constant involvement on the tools, which would prevent them from leading. 

Supervisors must plan beyond the current activity 

Site leadership requires forward thinking. A supervisor should know not only what the team is doing today, but what must be ready tomorrow and later in the week. They should understand which materials are required next, which area will become available, what access or plant is needed and whether drawings or approvals remain outstanding. They should also be aware of any likely interference from other trades and whether the current rate of progress remains consistent with the programme. These questions help prevent the site from becoming reactive. 

Without planning, the team may complete one activity and then wait for the next decision. Materials may arrive too late, labour may be moved unnecessarily and the project may lose momentum. The supervisor does not need to control every part of the project programme, but they should understand how the site team’s work fits within it. They should also be able to explain emerging risks to the project manager while there is still time to respond. A supervisor who looks only at the work directly in front of the team is managing the present. A supervisor who looks ahead is helping protect the project. 

Clear communication is a core supervisory skill 

Many strong operatives are promoted because they lead naturally through example. They work hard, maintain standards and help others when problems arise. Formal supervision requires more than example. Expectations must be communicated clearly. The team needs to understand what work is planned, how it should be completed, what quality standard applies and which site conditions require particular attention. Instructions should be specific enough to prevent misunderstanding. Telling a team to complete an area is not the same as confirming the sequence, material requirements, detail expectations, access restrictions and completion target. 

Communication also needs to work in both directions. The supervisor must listen to operatives who identify a problem, raise a concern or suggest a better method. People working directly with the materials and details often recognise issues before they become obvious elsewhere. A good supervisor does not dismiss that information simply because the original plan came from the office. They assess it, confirm the facts and communicate the issue to the appropriate person. The supervisor becomes the link between the site team and the wider project organisation. 

Daily planning creates control 

A short daily briefing can prevent a great deal of confusion. The supervisor should explain the day’s priorities, expected work areas, labour allocation, material needs, access limitations, quality concerns and relevant health and safety requirements. The briefing does not need to become a long meeting. It should give the team enough information to begin with a shared understanding. 

The supervisor should also confirm whether any issues from the previous day remain unresolved, including missing materials, revised details, access concerns or additional work that needs to be recorded separately. Daily planning allows the supervisor to organise the workforce properly. 

Not every operative has the same experience or strength. Some may be better suited to detailed work, while others may produce more effectively in open areas. Less experienced team members may need to work alongside someone who can provide guidance. Good labour allocation is not simply dividing people evenly across the roof. It is using the available skills in the way that best supports safety, quality and progress. 

Quality leadership begins before the inspection 

Supervisors are responsible for more than finding defects after work has been completed. They should create the conditions that prevent defects from occurring. That begins with confirming that the team has the correct drawings, details, materials and instructions. If a detail is unclear, the question should be raised before installation rather than after a larger area has been completed incorrectly. 

Early checks are particularly important when a team begins a new activity or complex detail. Inspecting the first completed section allows the supervisor to correct the method before the issue is repeated. Waiting until the end of the day or the completion of an entire area can make remedial work far more expensive. 

Quality leadership also means maintaining one standard across the team. Experienced operatives may have developed different working methods over time. Some variation may be harmless, but the completed roofing system must still meet the project requirements and manufacturer guidance. The supervisor must be prepared to address inconsistent work respectfully and directly. Avoiding a difficult conversation does not protect the relationship. It allows the problem to grow. 

Health and safety leadership must be visible 

A supervisor’s behaviour establishes the practical health and safety standard on site. Written procedures matter, but the team pays close attention to what the supervisor accepts in daily operations. If poor housekeeping is ignored, it becomes normal. If access arrangements are used incorrectly, others will follow. If programme pressure is allowed to override agreed controls, the message is clear. The supervisor must reinforce the planned method of work, confirm that controls remain suitable and act when conditions change. 

Roofing work can be affected quickly by weather, access, fragile surfaces, other trades and changes in the work area. A method that was appropriate at the beginning of the day may need to be reconsidered later. The supervisor should feel confident pausing the work when the conditions no longer support the planned approach. That does not make the supervisor unproductive. It demonstrates control. Effective supervision is not measured by keeping everyone working at all costs. It is measured by keeping the work organised, safe and consistent. 

Site records are part of project delivery 

New supervisors sometimes view reporting as an office responsibility. It is not. The site record explains what happened during the work and should capture labour, progress, delays, deliveries, instructions, access problems, weather effects, quality issues and additional work where relevant. Without that information, the office may know that the project is behind or over budget without understanding why. The record does not need to be lengthy, but it must be clear, factual and completed while the information is current. 

This is especially important when site conditions differ from the tender information or when the team receives an instruction that affects the original scope. A photograph can be valuable, but a photograph without context may not explain what changed or why it mattered. Good reporting connects the image, event and project impact. The supervisor’s records support project management, commercial control, client communication and lessons learned. They are part of managing the work properly. 

Supervisors need commercial awareness 

A supervisor does not need to become a quantity surveyor or contracts manager. They do need enough commercial awareness to understand that changes on site create cost. Additional preparation, repeated handling, altered access, revised details, waiting time and changes in sequence can all affect labour, plant and programme. If those issues are not recognised and communicated, the cost may disappear into the project. The supervisor’s responsibility is not to determine entitlement or agree the final value. 

It is to identify the event, record the resources affected and notify the project manager promptly. That simple discipline can make a significant difference to margin recovery. Commercial awareness also helps the supervisor understand why productivity matters. Labour hours are not an abstract office number. They represent the operating plan on which the tender was built.  

The supervisor should know the expected output and recognise when the team is falling behind, but the discussion should remain practical:  

• Is the team working inefficiently, or is the workface restricted?  
• Is the labour level wrong, or are operatives waiting for information?  
• Is the production assumption unrealistic, or has the sequence changed? 

The supervisor helps the business understand the cause, not simply the result. 

Leadership requires accountability and respect 

Supervisors must hold people accountable. That includes attendance, workmanship, productivity, behaviour, housekeeping and compliance with site requirements. Accountability does not require aggression. The strongest supervisors are clear, consistent and fair. They explain the expectation, address the issue promptly and avoid allowing personal relationships to create different standards for different people.  

This can be one of the hardest parts of moving from operative to supervisor. The new supervisor may now be responsible for people who were recently close colleagues. They may hesitate to correct poor performance because they do not want to damage those relationships. Avoiding the issue usually makes the situation worse. Other members of the team see when standards are applied inconsistently. Good operatives become frustrated when poor performance is tolerated, and the supervisor’s credibility begins to weaken. Respect is not maintained by ignoring problems. It is maintained through fairness, honesty and consistency. 

Contractors should define what good supervision looks like 

Many businesses promote supervisors without giving them a clear description of the role. The new supervisor is told to run the site but receives little explanation of what that means. They may focus on production because that is what they know best, while the company expects them to manage records, quality, labour, deliveries, coordination and communication. Those expectations should be defined. 

A practical supervisory standard might include conducting daily briefings, planning labour and upcoming work, confirming materials and access, monitoring quality, maintaining health and safety controls, recording site activity, reporting delays and changes, protecting materials and completed work and supporting the development of less experienced operatives. 

The specific responsibilities will vary by contractor and project type, but the supervisor should not have to guess what success looks like. Clear expectations also make performance reviews more useful. Instead of saying that someone needs to improve leadership, the business can discuss which responsibilities are being handled well and where additional development is required. 

Training should be practical and continuous 

Supervisor development should not consist of one course followed by an assumption that the person is fully prepared. Formal instruction can introduce planning, communication, health and safety, quality control, record keeping and basic commercial awareness. The contractor must then help the supervisor apply those principles on real projects. 

A project manager or experienced supervisor can review the daily plan, examine reports, discuss labour performance and help the new leader prepare for difficult conversations. Short, regular coaching is often more effective than waiting for a major problem. The supervisor should also be encouraged to ask questions. Some newly promoted leaders avoid asking for help because they believe the promotion means they are expected to know everything. That is unrealistic. They are learning a new role. Creating an environment where questions are accepted improves development and reduces the risk of issues being hidden until they become serious. 

Promotion should not be the only career path 

Not every highly skilled roofer wants to become a supervisor. Some people prefer technical work and may provide greater value as senior operatives, specialist installers, trainers or quality leaders. Contractors should avoid treating supervision as the only form of advancement. Promoting someone into a role they do not want can result in losing an excellent operative and gaining an unhappy supervisor.  

The conversation should begin with the individual’s interest, aptitude and long-term goals. Do they enjoy organising others? Can they communicate calmly? Are they willing to complete records and attend meetings? Can they address poor performance? Do they look ahead? Do other members of the team seek their guidance? 

Technical skill remains important, but the best candidate is not always the fastest or most experienced installer. Leadership potential should be considered separately. Creating respected technical career paths also helps contractors retain highly skilled people without forcing them into management. 

Strong supervisors create stronger businesses 

Effective supervisors improve much more than site productivity. They create better communication between site and office, identify risk earlier, support quality, improve records and help less experienced operatives develop. They also reduce the number of decisions that must be escalated to project managers and directors. That gives the business more capacity to grow. 

A contractor cannot manage an increasing number of projects effectively if every site depends on one senior leader in the office to solve every problem. Capable supervisors create control closer to the work. They understand the company’s expectations and apply them consistently on site. The transition from skilled roofer to effective supervisor does not happen automatically with a new title. 

It happens when the contractor defines the role, provides practical training, offers ongoing support and gives the individual an opportunity to grow into leadership. Technical ability may justify the opportunity. Leadership development determines whether the promotion succeeds. 

Learn more about Cotney Consulting Group in their Coffee Shop Directory or visit www.cotneyconsulting.com.

About the author 

John Kenney has more than 45 years of experience in the roofing industry. His career has included every level of roofing operations, from field installation and estimating through executive leadership. He is CEO of Cotney Consulting Group, a partner member of the International Federation for the Roofing Trades and earned the MIoR designation from the former Institute of Roofing in the United Kingdom. He works with roofing contractors to improve estimating, project management, operational performance, leadership and profitability. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

Successful projects don't just generate profit. They generate knowledge. 

One of the biggest mistakes I've seen throughout my career is that roofing companies spend far more time studying failure than they do success. Think about what usually happens after a project loses money. The estimate is reviewed. Labor hours are analyzed. Project managers are asked what happened. Foremen explain the challenges they encountered. Leadership gathers around conference tables trying to identify where things went wrong and how to keep it from happening again. That's a worthwhile exercise. 

But I've often wondered why we don't show the same level of curiosity when a project goes exceptionally well. Some of the most valuable lessons I've learned in this industry didn't come from difficult projects. They came from the ones that seemed almost effortless. The projects where communication flowed naturally. The crews stayed productive. Materials arrived when they were needed. Customers remained informed. The schedule held together. The project closed successfully. 

Those jobs weren't successful because everything happened perfectly. They were successful because a lot of people made good decisions before problems had the opportunity to grow. Unfortunately, once a profitable project is complete, many companies move on to the next one. The final invoice is sent. The file is closed. Everyone gets busy. An opportunity to learn quietly disappears. 

I've always believed success leaves clues just as failure does. The question is whether leadership takes the time to find them. One observation that's stayed with me over the years is that exceptional projects usually aren't built on extraordinary moments. They're built on ordinary disciplines performed consistently. The estimate accurately reflected the work. The project handoff was thorough. Materials were staged correctly. Communication stayed ahead of production. Questions were answered before they became delays.  

None of those actions attract much attention individually. Together, they create projects that seem almost easy. 

I've walked enough successful jobs to know they rarely happened by accident. Someone planned well. Someone communicated clearly. Someone anticipated challenges before they became problems. Someone followed through on commitments that most people never noticed. That's operational excellence. 

Another lesson experience has taught me is that successful projects tend to create false confidence. Leadership looks at the financial results, everyone is pleased and the assumption becomes that the company executed well. Maybe it did. But do we actually know why? 

• Which conversations made the biggest difference?  
• Which decisions protected production? 
• Which planning activities prevented delays? 
• Which leadership behaviors helped the crew perform at its best? 

Those answers deserve just as much attention as the questions we ask after difficult projects. 

I've often encouraged contractors to treat successful jobs as teaching opportunities. Bring the estimator into the discussion. Invite the project manager. Include the superintendent or foreman. Ask everyone the same simple question. "What made this project run so well?" 

The answers are rarely dramatic. Sometimes, better communication during the handoff is better. Sometimes it's a customer who responded quickly to questions. Sometimes it's a project manager who consistently stayed ahead of procurement. Sometimes it's simply a crew that understood the expectations before work ever began. Those observations matter because they identify behaviors worth repeating. 

I've found that average companies often focus on fixing weaknesses. Exceptional companies spend just as much time reinforcing strengths. There's an important difference. If leadership only studies problems, employees begin believing that reviews exist to assign blame.  

When leadership also studies success, reviews become opportunities to learn. That changes the culture.  People become more willing to share ideas. They become more engaged in improving the operation. They begin by looking for successful habits rather than simply avoiding mistakes. That's a healthier environment for everyone. 

One thing I've learned after many years of reviewing projects is that profitable jobs usually don't happen because one person performed exceptionally well. They happen because several people quietly performed their responsibilities consistently:  

• The estimator communicated clearly.  
• The project manager stayed organized.  
• The superintendent prepared the crew.  
• The foreman maintained production. 
• Accounting kept information moving. 

Leadership remained engaged without creating unnecessary distractions. 
When everyone did their part, nobody needed to be the hero. 

I've also noticed something else. Companies that regularly review successful projects tend to become more predictable over time. Why? Because they're identifying repeatable behaviors instead of hoping success happens again. They aren't relying on luck. They're building operational knowledge. 

Every successful project becomes another example of how the company wants work performed. That knowledge gradually becomes part of the culture. New project managers learn from experienced ones. Foremen understand what leadership values. Estimators gain confidence in production assumptions because they receive meaningful feedback from the field. The organization becomes stronger because success is no longer viewed as an outcome. It's viewed as a process. 

I've never believed continuous improvement comes only from correcting mistakes. It also comes from understanding why good work became exceptional. That's where future success is built.  

As roofing companies continue to face labor challenges, changing customer expectations and increasing competition, learning becomes one of the most valuable competitive advantages any organization can develop. 

The companies that improve year after year aren't simply fixing what went wrong. They're identifying what went right and making sure it happens again. Because successful projects don't just generate profit. They generate knowledge. And knowledge, when it's shared throughout the organization, becomes one of the few competitive advantages your competitors can never easily duplicate. 

Por Alberto Torres.

En octubre, nuestros lectores exploraron estrategias para mejorar la productividad, proteger las ganancias y construir negocios más sólidos y sustentables dentro de la industria del roofing.

El crecimiento de una empresa no depende únicamente de conseguir más proyectos, sino también de cómo se administran los recursos, se toman decisiones y se mantiene la disciplina operativa. Durante octubre, estos temas captaron la atención de nuestros lectores y destacaron la importancia de fortalecer las operaciones diarias para alcanzar el éxito a largo plazo.

Uno de los temas que más sobresalió durante el mes fue la importancia de mantener la disciplina operativa. En el artículo Por qué la pérdida gradual de disciplina operativa cuesta más de lo que la mayoría de los contratistas imagina, John Kenney de Cotney Consulting Group explica cómo, en una industria donde cada minuto y cada recurso cuentan, mantener procesos organizados y expectativas claras puede marcar una gran diferencia. Las pequeñas desviaciones en las operaciones diarias pueden acumularse y afectar la productividad, los costos y la rentabilidad de una empresa.

La importancia de contar con una estrategia empresarial también despertó interés entre nuestros lectores. Andres Beltrán, fundador de Build Lead Win y conferencista de SRS Para Latinos, abordó este tema en El crecimiento sostenible no sucede por accidente. Andres nos recuerda que expandir un negocio requiere planificación, liderazgo y decisiones bien fundamentadas. Además, destaca que, más allá de aumentar las ventas, los contratistas deben desarrollar sistemas y equipos capaces de respaldar ese crecimiento sin comprometer la calidad de sus servicios.

En otro de los artículos escritos por John Kenney, se destacó la importancia de proteger las ganancias. En Las pequeñas decisiones que protegen los márgenes del roofing, John habla sobre cómo las decisiones cotidianas pueden influir en los resultados financieros de una empresa. Desde la administración de materiales hasta la coordinación de los equipos, prestar atención a los detalles puede ayudar a reducir gastos innecesarios y mantener la rentabilidad de cada proyecto.

Otro tema que llamo la atención de nuestros lectores fue la importancia de comenzar bien el día en el lugar de trabajo. En el artículo La primera hora en el lugar de trabajo predice cómo se desarrollará todo el proyecto, John Kenney nos explica cómo lo que sucede durante la primera hora puede marcar la diferencia en el resto de la jornada. También nos recuerda que una buena comunicación, tener los materiales listos y saber cuáles son las responsabilidades de cada trabajador ayudan a que los proyectos se desarrollen de manera más organizada, eficiente y segura

Finalmente, la sustentabilidad continúa ganando terreno en nuestra industria. Durante METALCON 2026, representantes de empresas y organizaciones como Central States, Metal Roofing Alliance (MRA), Westlake Royal Building Products y Sherwin-Williams Coil and Extrusion compartieron perspectivas sobre el valor a largo plazo de los sistemas de roofing de metal y su contribución a una construcción más sustentable. Algunas de las conversaciones se concentraron en características específicas que pueden influir en el desempeño ambiental, desde el contenido reciclado utilizado en los productos hasta la posibilidad de reciclar los materiales al final de su vida útil.

Octubre nos dejó una lección importante: el éxito en la industria del roofing se construye a través de decisiones inteligentes, una buena planificación y el compromiso de mejorar continuamente. Desde las operaciones diarias hasta la incorporación de nuevas soluciones, cada paso representa una oportunidad para fortalecer nuestros negocios.

5 – Posicionando el roofing de metal como una opción sustentable

4 – La primera hora en el lugar de trabajo predice cómo se desarrollará todo el proyecto

3 – Las pequeñas decisiones que protegen los márgenes del roofing

2 – El crecimiento sostenible no sucede por accidente

1 – Por qué la pérdida gradual de disciplina operativa cuesta más de lo que la mayoría de los contratistas imagina

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

Learn about roofing's silent occupational hazard.

Ask a group of veteran roofers about the biggest safety risks they face, and you'll probably hear the same answers. Falls. Weather. Heavy lifting. Power tools. Traffic. Electricity. Rarely does someone mention the one hazard they've been exposed to almost every day of their career — the sun. 

Unlike most jobsite hazards, excessive ultraviolet (UV) exposure doesn't cause an immediate injury. There is no loud noise, no flashing warning light and no incident report at the end of the day. Instead, the damage builds slowly, year after year, often without anyone realizing it until decades later. 

For roofing professionals, the effects of long-term sun exposure deserve far more attention than they typically receive. Protecting crews isn't just about preventing today's accidents. It's also about protecting their health twenty and thirty years from now. 

The roof is one of the most demanding work environments

Anyone who has spent time on a roof during the summer understands the difference between the weather forecast and actual working conditions. An air temperature of 90 degrees can quickly become much hotter on the roof surface. White membranes reflect ultraviolet radiation upward. Metal roofs amplify glare. Dark roofing materials absorb heat while continuously radiating it back toward workers. 

Roofers aren't simply standing in the sun. They're surrounded by it. 

The combination of direct sunlight, reflected UV radiation and elevated surface temperatures creates one of the harshest outdoor work environments in construction. Most crews accept those conditions as simply part of the job. That acceptance, however, shouldn't prevent us from reducing unnecessary exposure. 

The damage happens slowly 

One of the biggest challenges with UV exposure is that the effects aren't immediately obvious. Unlike a fall or a laceration, excessive sun exposure doesn't usually stop production. Workers often think of sunburn as little more than an inconvenience. In reality, repeated UV exposure contributes to premature skin aging, eye damage andsignificantly increases the risk of skin cancer over the course of a career.  

Most roofers don't develop these problems after one summer. They develop them after forty summers. That's why this issue deserves the same level of attention as any other occupational hazard. 

Experience doesn't provide protection 

I've often heard experienced roofers say they no longer burn because they've "gotten used to the sun."  Unfortunately, that's not how ultraviolet radiation works. The absence of a severe sunburn doesn't mean the skin isn't being damaged. Every day of excessive exposure adds to the cumulative effect. In many ways, veteran roofers may actually face greater long-term risk simply because they've accumulated decades of exposure. Safety programs should recognize that occupational health isn't only about preventing today's injuries. It's also about protecting careers that may span forty or fifty years. 

Protection should become routine 

Fortunately, reducing UV exposure doesn't require complicated procedures. Like many safety improvements, consistency matters more than complexity. Lightweight long-sleeved performance shirts, wide-brim attachments designed for hard hats, quality UV-blocking safety glasses, neck protection and regular sunscreen application all reduce cumulative exposure. 

These shouldn't be viewed as optional comfort items. They should become standard components of personal protective equipment during outdoor work. The same companies that invest in fall protection equipment should also invest in protecting employees from occupational hazards that develop over decades instead of seconds. 

Planning makes a difference 

Operational planning can also reduce unnecessary exposure. During periods of extreme heat and intense UV conditions, project managers should evaluate work sequencing whenever practical. Tasks requiring prolonged exposure in open areas can often be scheduled earlier in the day while shaded work, staging activities, equipment preparation or interior tasks are completed during peak afternoon conditions. 

No roofing contractor can eliminate sun exposure. Every contractor can manage it more intelligently. These decisions protect workers while often improving productivity by reducing heat-related fatigue. 

Leadership sets the standard 

One of the greatest influences on safety culture is what supervisors choose to emphasize. If foremen consistently wear neck protection, sunglasses and sunscreen while encouraging crews to do the same, employees quickly recognize these practices as normal. If leadership ignores long-term health risks, crews will usually do so as well.  

Safety culture isn't built through written policies alone. It's built by the daily example set by field leadership. The message should be simple. Protecting yourself from the sun isn't about comfort. It's about making sure today's work doesn't create tomorrow's medical problems. 

Don't forget your eyes 

Skin isn't the only concern. Years of ultraviolet exposure can also contribute to cataracts and other vision problems. Roofers spend countless hours looking across highly reflective roof surfaces where sunlight bounces directly into their eyes. Quality safety glasses that provide UV protection should be considered essential PPE, not merely impact protection. Clear vision isn't only important for long-term health. It's critical for safely navigating roof edges, recognizing hazards and performing quality workmanship every day. 

Looking beyond today's job 

One of the signs of a mature safety program is its willingness to think beyond immediate injuries. The best companies understand that protecting employees means considering both today's hazards and tomorrow's health. 

Just as we encourage hearing protection before hearing loss develops, we should encourage sun protection before skin damage becomes permanent. The goal isn't simply getting through another project safely. The goal is helping employees enjoy long, healthy careers after decades in the roofing industry. 

Final thoughts 

The most dangerous occupational hazards aren't always the ones that cause immediate injuries. Sometimes they're the ones we become so accustomed to that we stop noticing them altogether. 

For roofers, ultraviolet exposure is a hazard. Every day spent on a roof leaves an impression. Most of the time we can't see it happening, but the effects accumulate throughout an entire career. The best roofing companies understand that safety isn't measured only by the accidents that didn't happen today. It's also measured by the long-term health of the people who helped build the company's success over the last forty years. 

By Emma Peterson.

We’re counting down the 10 most-read stories from The Coffee Shops® to help you stay on top of the latest industry conversations.

Though it may be hard to believe, October is already coming to a close. And if your month has been anything like ours here at The Coffee Shops®, it’s been busy and hard to keep up with!

To make it a bit easier for our readers to catch up on the biggest industry news and stories from October 2026, we’ve collected our top ten articles published this past month.

As our readers move into the off-season, we’ve seen an uptick of interest in training and business development articles! On the training side, our top ten list includes an article about John Kenney of Cotney Consulting Group's upcoming two-day live classroom training workshop (November 17-18, 2026) and an article based on a conversation with Rick Johnson of Tremco CPG about partnering with manufacturers that back their products up with training.

On the business development side, Emma Peterson wrote three articles for The Coffee Shops® highlighting different ways contractors can set their businesses up for success. The first, which comes in at number 6 on our list, talks about four takeaways from a decade of RoofersCoffeeShop® Trends Reports. The other articles, which take spots 3 and 2, take a look at the state of the economy going into the last quarter of the year and at the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA)'s live LEGALCon event, respectively.

As for our top article of the month, it was all about "the certifications, technologies and best practices that help roofing professionals build more fire-resilient structures.”

Our top ten articles from October

10 - The business case for smarter construction recycling

9 - Extending building life starts with education and training

8 - Advocacy remains a roofing priority

7 - Building smarter roofers with expert training

6 - A decade of roofing trends

5 - Good project managers think three weeks ahead

4 - NWIR scholarship opens doors for future roofing leaders

3 - Going into the last quarter of 2026

2 - Set yourself apart from the competition at LEGALCon 2026

1 - Creating a more fire-safe future

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

The question isn't whether learning is taking place. The question is whether your organization is teaching the lessons that will make it stronger tomorrow than it is today.

One of the biggest misconceptions in business is that training only happens when people gather in a conference room, attend a seminar or complete an online course. In reality, training starts the moment someone walks through the door. Every conversation. Every decision. Every project meeting. Every jobsite. Every interaction between a foreman and a new crew member. Every response from a project manager. Every expectation an owner reinforces — or overlooks. 

Whether a company realizes it or not, it's teaching people how the business operates every single day. The only question is whether those lessons are intentional. I've spent much of my career helping roofing contractors improve operations, and one observation has stayed with me through every company I've worked with. People usually don't perform the way leadership expects. They perform the way leadership consistently demonstrates. That's an important distinction. 

I've walked into companies that proudly told me they had excellent procedures, detailed manuals and well-developed systems. Yet when I spent time with their teams, I found something entirely different. Employees weren't following the documented process because they had learned another one. 

They had learned how the company actually operated. Those lessons didn't come from a training manual. They came from:  

• Watching experienced employees 
• Seeing which standards leadership enforced and which ones quietly disappeared when business became busy. 
• Observing what happened when mistakes occurred, deadlines slipped or communication broke down. 

People pay far more attention to behavior than they do to policy. 

One lesson I've learned over the years is that culture isn't created by what a company says. It's created by what the company consistently accepts. If incomplete job documentation is tolerated, new employees learn documentation isn't really important. If project handoff meetings are frequently skipped, new project managers quickly conclude they're optional. If change orders are delayed until the end of the project, that becomes the accepted way of doing business. Nobody needs to explain those expectations. People learn them simply by working there. 

I've also noticed that new employees become remarkably good observers. Before they're confident enough to make decisions on their own, they're watching everyone around them. 

• How does the superintendent handle pressure? 
• How does the project manager communicate with the customer? 
• How does the estimator respond when production questions arise? 
• How does the owner react when problems develop? 

Those observations become the foundation of their professional habits. Long before they're officially trained, they're already learning. That's why experienced leaders understand they're always setting an example, even when they don't realize it. 

A foreman who begins every morning with a clear plan is teaching preparation. A project manager who follows through on commitments is teaching accountability. An estimator who takes the time to explain production assumptions is teaching collaboration. An owner who remains calm during difficult situations is teaching confidence. Those lessons become part of the company's culture because people naturally repeat what they experience most often. 

Unfortunately, the opposite is equally true. I've seen organizations unintentionally train employees to accept constant firefighting as normal. They learned that planning could wait because someone would eventually solve the problem. They learned that communication wasn't necessary until something went wrong. They learned that documentation could always be completed later. Over time, those habits became the company's operating system. No one designed it that way. It simply developed through repetition.  

One observation that has stayed with me throughout my career is that companies don't drift toward excellence. They drift toward whatever behaviors leadership reinforces most consistently. That's why culture requires far more than good intentions. It requires consistency. 

One thing I admire about exceptional roofing companies is that they recognize teaching doesn't stop after orientation. Every project becomes an opportunity to develop people. Job reviews aren't simply discussions about profit and loss. They're learning sessions. Project meetings aren't just about schedules. They're opportunities to improve communication and decision-making. 

Even mistakes become valuable if leadership takes the time to explain what happened and how similar situations can be avoided in the future. That approach creates something every contractor wants, but very few intentionally build. Institutional knowledge. Knowledge that doesn't exist in one person's head. Knowledge that's shared, reinforced and passed from one generation of employees to the next. 

I've often said that one of the greatest risks facing any roofing company isn't losing a customer. It's losing decades of experience because no one took the time to pass it on. Strong companies don't allow that to happen. They create environments where experienced people teach naturally because leadership values learning as much as production. 

Another lesson I've carried with me over the years is that training isn't measured by how many classes employees attend. It's measured by how they perform when no one is watching. That's when habits reveal themselves. That's when culture becomes visible. 

Technology has created tremendous opportunities to improve learning. Online training, digital resources and mobile access have made education more available than ever before. Those tools are valuable, and they should absolutely be part of a company's development strategy. 

But technology doesn't replace leadership. People still learn most effectively by watching experienced professionals make decisions, solve problems and demonstrate the standards expected throughout the organization. That's how confidence is built. That's how judgment develops. That's how future leaders emerge. 

The strongest roofing companies I've worked with understand that every day is a training day. Every conversation either strengthens the culture or weakens it. Every decision either reinforces expectations or quietly changes them. Every leader is teaching something. Whether they intended to or not. Because your roofing company is always training someone. 

By John Kenney.  

Roofing companies don't improve simply because people work harder. They improve because leadership helps people focus on what matters most. 

Walk into almost any roofing company during the busy season, and you'll see the same thing. Phones are ringing. Estimators are turning around bids. Project managers are juggling multiple jobs. Crews are moving from one project to the next. Owners are answering questions before finishing the last conversation. From the outside, it looks productive. Everyone is busy. The problem is that being busy has never guaranteed that the business is moving in the right direction. 

Over the years, I've noticed that some of the hardest-working roofing companies I've encountered weren't necessarily the most profitable. They had talented people, good reputations and plenty of work. Yet they constantly felt like they were trying to catch up. At the same time, I've worked with companies that seemed noticeably calmer. They weren't working less. They weren't less committed. In many cases, they were actually growing faster. The difference wasn't effort. It was focus.  

One lesson this industry has reinforced throughout my career is that efficiency and effectiveness are not the same thing. Efficiency is about doing work quickly. Effectiveness is about making sure you're doing the right work in the first place. Those two ideas often get confused. 

A project manager can answer fifty emails in a day and still avoid the one conversation that would have prevented next week's scheduling problem. An estimator can produce more bids than anyone else in the office but spend valuable time pursuing projects that never fit the company's strengths. An owner can attend meetings from morning until evening without making a single decision that moves the company forward.Everyone was efficient. Very little was effective. 

I've learned that roofing companies don't usually become overwhelmed because people are lazy. They become overwhelmed because everyone is busy responding to work instead of intentionally directing it. That distinction changes everything. Think about how often interruptions shape the day. A customer calls with an urgent question. A supplier needs clarification. A foreman encounters an unexpected condition. Accounting needs information. Another opportunity to bid arrives. Every one of those situations deserves attention. But not every one deserves immediate attention. 

One of the characteristics I've consistently seen in exceptional leaders is their ability to distinguish between activity and priority. They don't simply ask, "What needs to be done?" They ask, "What matters most right now?" That question sounds simple. In practice, it's incredibly difficult. Especially in roofing. 

Construction has a way of making everything feel urgent. Weather changes. Deliveries move. Customers call. Crews need answers. Without discipline, the loudest issue quickly becomes the most important one — even when it shouldn't.  

I've walked enough jobs to know that some of the biggest operational problems started because leadership became consumed by the urgent while quietly neglecting the important. Planning meetings were postponed.Project reviews were delayed. Training was pushed to another week. Communication became shorter. Documentation waited until tomorrow. No one intended for those things to happen. Everyone was trying to survive the day. Eventually, the day started running the business instead of leadership running the day. 

Another observation that's stayed with me is that effective leaders become very comfortable saying no. Not because they don't care. Because they understand that every yes carries a cost. Every unnecessary meeting consumes time that could have been spent coaching a project manager. Every project accepted without available management capacity affects every existing customer. Every interruption accepted without question steals attention from something more important.  

Time is one of the few resources a roofing company cannot purchase more of. The strongest leaders protect it carefully. I've often told owners that one of the most valuable exercises they can perform is reviewing how leadership spent the previous week. Not what was accomplished. How time was invested. Did most decisions move the business forward? Or did leadership spend another week reacting to whatever appeared next? The answer usually explains a great deal about the company's operational performance. 

Technology has certainly improved efficiency. Estimating software is faster. Project management platforms organize information better. Artificial intelligence is helping contractors complete tasks that once requiredsignificant manual effort. Those are meaningful advancements.  

But technology doesn't determine effectiveness. It simply allows companies to perform existing processes more quickly. If the wrong priorities are driving the work, faster technology helps organizations become more efficient at heading in the wrong direction. That's an uncomfortable thought. It's also an important one. 

The companies I've admired most throughout my career weren't the busiest. They weren't the loudest. They weren't constantly celebrating how much work they had under contract. What impressed me was something much simpler. They seemed to know exactly where leadership belonged. Owners focused on leading. Project managers focused on managing. Foremen focused on execution.  

Everyone understood their priorities. Because priorities were clear, decisions became clearer. Because decisions became clearer, operations became more predictable. And because operations became more predictable, profitability usually followed. 

One lesson I've never forgotten is that roofing companies don't improve simply because people work harder. They improve because leadership helps people focus on what matters most. That's effectiveness. Efficiency makes companies faster. Effectiveness makes them better. The strongest roofing companies understand they need both. But if forced to choose between the two, they'll always prioritize effectiveness. Because moving quickly in the wrong direction has never been a winning strategy. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

In roofing, companies rarely lose their edge overnight. More often...they slowly drift away from it. 

One of the biggest challenges facing successful roofing companies isn't a lack of opportunity. It isn't finding work, investing in technology or even attracting good people. It's maintaining the operational discipline that made them successful in the first place. 

I've watched companies grow from a handful of employees into organizations with multiple crews, several project managers and an impressive backlog of work. From the outside, they looked like success stories. Revenue was increasing. New customers were coming in. The business appeared healthy. 

Then, almost without anyone noticing, things started to change. Project reviews became less consistent. Communication between departments became more informal. Jobsite visits happened a little less often. Purchasing decisions became rushed. Documentation slipped. Follow-up conversations that once happened automatically were postponed because everyone was busy. 

None of those changes seemed significant at the time. Together, they changed the company. 

I've come to believe that roofing companies rarely lose operational control because of one major event. They lose it through operational drift. Operational drift doesn't announce itself. It doesn't send an email or show up during a management meeting. It happens quietly. Processes that were once followed every time become "most of the time." Meetings that were once considered essential become optional. Once non-negotiable standards slowly become suggestions. The company continues moving forward, but the discipline that built its reputation begins fading in small, almost invisible ways.  

That's what makes operational drift so dangerous. It feels harmless. One thing I've learned over the years is that people rarely wake up and decide to lower their standards. Good people don't intentionally create average companies. Operational drift happens because everyone is trying to solve today's problem. When the phones are ringing, projects are behind schedule and customers need answers, it's easy to convince yourself that you'll get back to the process later. The problem is that "later" tends to become permanent. 

I've seen estimating reviews disappear because everyone was focused on bidding more work. I've seen project handoff meetings shortened until they eventually disappeared altogether. I've watched job cost reviews become quarterly discussions instead of the conversations that used to happen after every project. None of those decisions were made because leadership stopped caring. They were made because everyone believed they were saving time. In reality, they were borrowing problems from the future. 

One observation has stayed with me throughout my career. Strong operations aren't built on extraordinary decisions. They're built on ordinary disciplines repeated consistently. 

The daily habits that don't seem exciting are usually the ones protecting profitability. A project manager who follows up when they said they would. A superintendent who completes documentation before leaving the jobsite. An estimator who communicates assumptions instead of expecting others to figure them out. An owner who insists on reviewing projects even when the company is busy. 

Those aren't extraordinary actions. They're operational disciplines. The strongest companies protect them because they understand something many organizations overlook. Consistency compounds. So does inconsistency. 

Another mistake I see is assuming growth automatically means improvement. Growth creates opportunity, but it also magnifies weaknesses. A process that worked with two project managers may begin breaking down with six. Communication that felt natural in a twenty-person company becomes much more difficult when the organization reaches one hundred employees. Responsibilities become less clear. Decisions take longer.Information travels through more people. Without intentional structure, operational drift accelerates. That's why I often tell contractors that growth doesn't create operational problems. It exposes the ones that were already there. 

I've also noticed that operational drift usually appears long before financial reports reveal it. Margins slowly become less predictable. Projects require more management attention. Crews spend more time waiting for decisions. Customers begin asking more questions. Leadership feels busier than ever but struggles to explain why. Those are operational warning signs. The financial results arrive later. 

The companies that avoid operational drift have something in common. They periodically stop and ask themselves difficult questions: 

• Are we still following the processes that made us successful?  
• Have our standards changed without us realizing it? 
• Are we solving problems — or simply becoming better at living with them? 

Those conversations require honesty. They also require leadership. 

One lesson I've carried with me over the years is that companies don't stay excellent by accident. Operational excellence has to be protected. Every process. Every expectation. Every standard. Not because people can'tbe trusted. Because organizations naturally drift toward whatever leadership consistently reinforces. 

That's why culture matters. Culture isn't built by mission statements hanging on a wall. It's built by what leadership chooses to inspect, discuss and expect every single day. If leadership stops paying attention to the details, eventually everyone else will too.  

The encouraging news is that operational drift is completely reversible. It doesn't require rebuilding the company. It requires reconnecting the organization with the disciplines that made it successful in the first place.Sometimes that means slowing down long enough to evaluate how work is actually being performed. Sometimes it means having conversations that should have happened months earlier. Sometimes it means simply refusing to accept "good enough" where excellence once existed. 

The longer I've worked in this industry, the more convinced I've become that successful roofing companies don't outperform their competitors because they're constantly changing. They outperform them because they protect the habits, standards and operational disciplines that continue to produce predictable results year after year. 

Because in roofing, companies rarely lose their edge overnight. More often...they slowly drift away from it. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group. 

An effective job-cost review turns a financial result into useful operating information. 

A roofing contractor can complete a project, issue the final application for payment and close the file without ever fully understanding what the work actually taught the business. That is a missed opportunity. Every completed project contains information that can improve the next tender. It shows how labour performed, whether material quantities were accurate, how long plant remained on hire, where access affected productivity and which assumptions proved realistic. 

The problem is that many businesses review project cost only to determine whether the job made or lost money. That matters, but it is not enough. A final margin tells the contractor the result. It does not always explain why the result occurred.  

A proper job-cost review should connect the financial outcome to the way the project was estimated, planned and delivered. When that connection is made consistently, completed projects begin improving future tenders. Without it, the estimating team may continue using the same rates and assumptions even when actual performance has changed. 

The final margin is only the starting point 

The first question in a project review is often simple.  

Did the project achieve the expected margin? 

That question is important, but the answer should lead to a much deeper discussion. A project may have achieved its target overall while performing poorly in several areas. A profitable variation may have hidden a labour overrun, a favourable material purchase may have covered extended plant hire or a strong final account settlement may have made the project appear operationally better than it was. 

The opposite can also happen. A well-managed project may produce a disappointing result because the original tender was too low, the programme changed or the contractor accepted a commercial condition that created additional cost. 

Looking only at the final percentage can therefore give the business the wrong lesson. The review should separate the result into its main parts and examine how labour, materials, plant, subcontract costs, supervision, delays and variations compared with the original allowance. This turns a financial result into useful operating information. 

Labour needs to be reviewed in detail 

Labour is usually one of the highest controllable costs on a roofing project, but it is often reviewed too broadly. The report may show that the project used 1,200 labour hours against an allowance of 1,000. That identifies an overrun, but it does not explain it.  

The business must understand where the additional 200 hours were used. Were production rates lower than expected? Did the team spend more time distributing materials? Was access restricted? Did the project require additional visits? Were operatives waiting for other trades? Did the client change the sequence? Was more preparation required than the tender allowed? Did quality issues create remedial work? 

The answer matters because each cause requires a different response. If the original production rate was unrealistic, future estimates should change. If the overrun was caused by site disruption, the tender process should identify and qualify that risk more clearly. If the team lacked experience with the system, training or supervision may need improvement. If additional work was completed without recovery, the variation process needs attention. 

The business should never adjust a labour rate simply because one project exceeded the estimate. It should adjust the rate when the evidence shows that the underlying assumption no longer reflects actual performance. 

Production rates should come from real work 

Many estimating systems rely on standard production rates built over time. Those rates are useful, but they should not become permanent simply because they are familiar. Roofing work changes. Materials change, installation methods improve, packaging and delivery arrangements evolve, site restrictions increase and the workforce changes. A rate that was realistic five years ago may no longer reflect the way projects are delivered today. Job-cost reviews provide the evidence needed to keep those rates current. 

If a particular system repeatedly takes longer than the estimating allowance, the contractor should investigate why. The issue may be the rate itself, but it may also be that the rate does not account for details, access or project type. Installing a large uninterrupted area is different from working around numerous rooflights, penetrations and changes in level. A new-build project with planned access is different from a refurbishment project on an occupied building. A continuous workface is different from several small phased areas. 

The estimating database should reflect those differences where practical. The goal is not to create a separate rate for every possible condition. It is to prevent the business from applying one general assumption where the work consistently behaves differently. 

Material review should include quantity, price and waste 

Material cost is another area where the final invoice total does not tell the whole story. The contractor should compare estimated quantities with actual usage and consider whether the measured quantities, packaging assumptions and waste allowances were realistic. 

Did the project require more laps, cuts or detailing than expected? Was material damaged? Were partial packs or rolls left unused? Did changes in sequence create additional waste? Were split orders or urgent purchases required? 

The review should also consider purchase price. The estimate may have used a supplier quotation that expired before the order was placed. A substitute product may have been required. Additional carriage may have been paid, or smaller orders may have reduced purchasing leverage. 

These differences should not automatically be treated as estimating errors. The purpose is to understand whether the original allowance remains realistic and whether procurement decisions affected the result. Waste deserves particular attention because it is often hidden inside total material usage. A project may appear to have consumed the expected quantity overall while one detail or roof area generated considerably more waste than planned. That lesson should return to estimating. 

Plant duration should be compared with the programme 

Plant costs are usually linked closely to project duration. If the programme extends, plant hire often extends with it. A job-cost review should compare the planned duration of cranes, hoists, telehandlers, scaffolding, mobile elevating work platforms and other access equipment with the actual duration. 

If the equipment remained on site longer, the business should understand why. Was the original programme too short? Did access begin later than expected? Was the work resequenced? Did another trade delay release of the roof area? Was the equipment hired too early? Could it have been released sooner? Did the contractor need to return later because the work was completed in phases? 

These questions improve both estimating and project planning. The review should also consider associated costs such as delivery, collection, fuel, operators, permits and repeated mobilisation. The weekly hire rate is rarely the complete financial effect. 

Supervision and management time should not disappear into overhead 

Project management and supervision are often underestimated because some of the cost is carried within company overhead. That does not mean the project did not consume the resource. A contracts manager may spend additional weeks coordinating a delayed project. A site supervisor may remain in place longer than planned. Senior management may become involved in commercial disputes, client communication or recovery planning. 

Those hours have value. If one project demands far more management time than expected, the business should understand why. Was the project inherently complex? Was the tender allowance too low? Did poor information create repeated questions? Did weak site reporting require more office involvement? Did the client’s management structure increase meeting and reporting demands? Did commercial problems require senior intervention? 

Not every hour needs to be charged directly to the project for the review to be useful. The contractor should still recognise which projects consume disproportionate management attention. That information can influence future pricing, staffing and project selection. 

Variations can distort the lesson 

Variations are an important part of the final project result, but they can make the underlying operating performance harder to see. A project may finish above its original margin because additional work was priced favourably. That does not necessarily mean the base contract performed well.  

The contractor should separate original-scope performance from variation performance where possible. Did the tendered work achieve the expected margin? Did variations recover their full labour, material, plant and management cost? Were any changes completed but not valued? Did the business carry the cost for too long? Was additional work recorded clearly enough to support recovery? 

This distinction prevents profitable changes from hiding weaknesses in the original delivery plan. It also shows whether the variation process itself is working. A variation that creates revenue but disrupts the base programme may still reduce overall project efficiency, so both the commercial value and operational effect should be reviewed. 

Interim review and final review serve different purposes 

A detailed final review is valuable, but contractors should not wait until completion to look at cost performance. If labour is already exceeding the allowance halfway through the project, the business needs to know then. If material usage is higher than expected, the team should investigate before placing the final orders. If plant is likely to remain on site longer, management should understand the reason while options still exist. 

Interim reviews help protect the current project. Final reviews improve the next one. A monthly or milestone-based review can provide enough information to identify trends without creating an excessive administrative burden. The frequency should reflect the size, duration and risk of the project. The important point is that cost information must reach the people who can influence the outcome. A report that arrives after every decision has been made is accounting history. Useful job costing supports current management and future estimating. 

The review must include the people who know what happened 

Financial reports alone cannot explain project performance. The estimator understands how the allowance was built. The project manager knows which conditions changed. The site supervisor understands what affected labour and sequence. Procurement knows what happened with suppliers and lead times. The commercial team understands variation recovery and payment. 

A useful job-cost review brings those perspectives together. This does not require a large meeting or an elaborate presentation. It requires the right people to compare what was planned with what occurred and agree on the lesson. 

If labour exceeded the estimate, the site team should explain the operating conditions. If material cost increased, procurement should explain whether the cause was price, quantity, timing or delivery. If the programme extended, the project manager should identify the events that drove the delay. If recovery was weak, the commercial team should explain whether the issue was records, notice, valuation or entitlement. Without that discussion, the business risks changing the wrong thing. 

Lessons must reach the estimating system 

A project review has limited value if the conclusions remain in meeting notes. The lesson must change something. A production rate may need to be revised, a waste factor adjusted, a plant allowance increased for a particular type of project or a tender checklist expanded to address access, phasing or occupied premises. A supplier lead time may need updating, a recurring detail may need a separate labour allowance or a qualification may need to be strengthened. 

The change should be specific and assigned to someone. Otherwise, the same lesson will appear again on the next project. This is where many contractors lose the benefit of job costing. They identify the problem but do not update the estimating tools, procedures or assumptions that created it. The meeting ends, the project is archived and the next tender begins from the same information as before. That is not continuous improvement. 

Not every result should change the rate 

Job-cost reviews must also be used carefully. One unusual project should not automatically rewrite the estimating system. A severe access restriction, client-driven delay or unexpected condition may make the project unrepresentative of normal work.  

The contractor should look for patterns. If the same issue appears across several projects, the evidence is stronger. If one system repeatedly uses more labour, one detail regularly creates excess waste or one project type consistently requires more supervision, the estimating model should reflect that experience. 

The review should distinguish between a one-off event, a project-specific condition, a repeated operating problem and an estimating assumption that is no longer accurate. That distinction prevents overreaction and keeps the estimating system grounded in reliable information. 

Good data supports better project selection 

Job-cost reviews can also help the contractor understand where the business performs best. A particular type of project may appear attractive by contract value but consistently demand excessive management time. Another may generate strong margins but create heavy cash-flow pressure. Some clients may provide repeat work with predictable conditions, while others create frequent change and delayed recovery. 

The business should understand which systems, project sizes and client relationships fit its workforce and management structure. Not every available project is the right project. A contractor that understands its actual performance can pursue work where its experience and operating system create an advantage. 

Job costing should create a learning cycle 

The most valuable job-cost system is not the one with the most reports. It is the one that changes future decisions. The tender establishes the expected cost and operating plan. The project produces actual results. Interim reviews help protect the work while it is still in progress. The final review explains the differences and converts them into better estimating assumptions. 

That cycle should continue throughout the life of the business.  

• Estimating informs delivery. 
• Delivery creates evidence. 
• Evidence improves estimating. 

When that connection is strong, the contractor becomes more accurate over time. Labour allowances become more realistic, procurement risks become easier to identify, and project teams begin with better information. When that connection is weak, the business repeats the same assumptions and hopes for a different result. A job-cost review should do more than confirm whether the project made money. It should make the next tender better. 

Learn more about Cotney Consulting Group in their Coffee Shop Directory or visit www.cotneyconsulting.com.

About the author 

John Kenney has more than 45 years of experience in the roofing industry. His career has included every level of roofing operations, from field installation and estimating through executive leadership. He is CEO of Cotney Consulting Group, a partner member of the International Federation for the Roofing Trades and earned the MIoR designation from the former Institute of Roofing in the United Kingdom. He works with roofing contractors to improve estimating, project management, operational performance, leadership and profitability. 

By Emma Peterson. 

Woodchuck.ai rethinking how jobsite waste is handled in order to support sustainability goals while creating measurable financial benefits. 

Sustainability has become a key talking point for contractors. As John Kenney, the CEO of Cotney Consulting Group put it, “Not that long ago, sustainability discussions were limited to a handful of projects...Today, that conversation has become much more mainstream. Building owners are asking about energy efficiency, architects are exploring sustainable design options and municipalities are increasingly adopting standards that encourage greener building practices.” And as this demand for more sustainable practices rises, it is crucial that contractors not only consider the sustainability of the products they are installing, but also the sustainability of their building practices. 

This idea, of building more sustainable practices in addition to products, is what Todd Thomas and the team at Woodchuck.ai focuses on. We got the chance to learn more about their work and its benefits on an episode of Contractor Outlook™ we recorded with Todd. 

What Woodchuck.ai does is bring dumpsters to jobsites. But rather than your typical, throw everything and the kitchen sink into the same place, these dumpsters are designed to be used for material sorting. In fact, they utilize cameras and artificial intelligence software to help ensure that materials are separated properly. Then, when a dumpster is full, the Woodchuck.ai team can collect it, and take that sorted material, whether that’s asphalt products or wood products, and recycle it easily because it’s already sorted. 

Todd described how this separating and recycling of materials is such a good thing for sustainability, sharing, “We have a finite number of landfills across the United States and if you look at these landfills, they're often 30-40% wood by volume. And that wood is coming from things like construction site mixed dumpsters.” He went on, “So if we can get crews to sort their materials, we can keep that wood out of the landfill, extend the life of that landfill and get additional value out of that wood all at the same time.”  

And the best part of this whole set up? Not only can contractors feel good about their impact on the environment, it also can give them financial benefits. Todd explained:  

It might seem like a big change to start sorting materials, but it’s something that actually is pretty easy after you do it once and comes with benefits beyond sustainability. For example, we just partnered with a contractor who worked on Ford’s EV battery factory in Marshall, Michigan. Over the course of that project, we diverted 10,000 tons of wood from the landfills and instead were able to turn it into 10,000 megawatts of clean electricity. In addition to being an incredible win for sustainability, that diversion also returned a savings to the contractor of $1.6 million!  

With that kind of savings, it’s hard to deny the positive impact the Woodchuck.ai team is providing for both the environment and contractors in the field. As Todd put it, “If we can extend the life of our existing landfills by making sure that valuable materials don't get buried there, it's a win for everybody. It's a win for the contractor, it's a win for the community and it's a win for whoever was going to have the next landfill next to them.” 

Listen to the whole episode or Watch the recorded episode to learn more about Woodchuck.ai.