Debate: Do we still need full-time project superintendents on every site?

I've been in commercial construction for 22 years now, starting in the early 2000s. Back then, every job over $2 million had a superintendent living on site, walking the job daily. Now with remote monitoring cameras, drone flyovers, and digital blueprints, I see more jobs running with a part-time super or even a lead foreman calling the shots. Last month on a 40,000 square foot retail build in Columbus, we had no full-time super and honestly it went smooth except for a concrete pour delay. Has anyone else tried cutting back on site supervision and seen it work out, or do you think it's a risk that costs more in the long run?

2 comments

2 Comments

elizabeth_ramirez6d ago

A concrete pour delay without a full-time super sounds minor until you consider how many trades got backed up because of that one mistake. Remote cameras are great for catching problems after they happen, but they can't walk the floor and spot a bad cold joint forming in real time. The risk might not show up on one smooth job, but it usually costs more across a few projects when nobody was there to catch the small things early.

noah9146d ago

Honestly, @elizabeth_ramirez you just changed my whole view on this. I used to think a good camera setup and a few check-ins could cover the bases, but seeing how a single pour delay ripples through every trade made me realize I was wrong. I've watched drywall crews show up to a slab that wasn't cured right, and they just sit there burning money. Cameras can show you the cold joint after it's set, but they can't yell at a guy to fix his mix while he's still working. That small stuff adds up fast across a few projects, and I'm starting to see why a real person on site is worth the cost.