Superintendent Pre-Construction Workflow

Sources and confidence

• Primary: the Tom Kirk interview 2026-08-05 (TOM-F4 to F50) and the Connor Fields interview 2026-08-06 (CON-F3 to F47).
• Office boundary: the 2026-07-21 office/bidding session (OFF-F38 to F74). Framing: the 2026-05-19 discovery conversation (DISC-F1 to F28).
• Tool state: the 2026-08-11 tech-stack session (STACK-F2 to F31). The JobTread and Quo decision comes from operator confirmation 2026-08-25.
• Every `gap` activity traces to a source naming the absence or to a claim in this map that no activity backs up.
• Confidence is high on the schedule phases (both superintendents walked them) and lower on Phases 2 and 3, where only Tom describes doing the work and the principal disagrees.
• Status notes: 2.1.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2 are `draft` because ownership is contested; 2.2.3 because the principal said "might" (OFF-F52); 5.2.1 because only Tom described it (TOM-F31); 4.3.1 is `active` on two sources (OFF-F56, DISC-F28).

Structure notes

• Five phases, all owned by the superintendent. The only handoffs between functions are at the two ends: office to field at Phase 1, pre-construction to field execution after Phase 5.
• Phases 2, 3, and 5 often happen at the same time.
• Processes 1.2 and 4.3 have one activity each and stay separate: 1.2 is planned practice, not current practice; 4.3 waits on question 5.
• This map owns Long-Lead Procurement (5.2), Owner-Facing Schedule (4.3), and Schedule Review (4.2); the Field Execution map points to them. Processes 2.1, 2.2, and 3.2 may move to the office bidding map once ownership is settled.
• Counts: 5 phases, 11 processes, 30 core activities, 1 to 4 activities per process.
• Status counts: 15 `active`, 7 `draft` (1.2.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.4), 8 `gap` (1.1.2, 2.2.4, 3.1.3, 4.1.4, 4.2.4, 5.1.3, 5.2.2, 5.2.3). Do not paste `draft` or `gap` items as `active`.

Rule deviations

[Rule deviation] Tom, Connor, and "the principal" are named in descriptions, notes, and questions. Their eight differences cannot be kept without names. Titles, Roles, and Sub-functions carry no names. See question 16.

[Rule deviation] Middle phases have no handoff-in text because the same role owns every phase.

Tom versus Connor divergences (logged, not blended)

1. Entry trigger. Tom: the first set of plans. Connor: permits reaching the city plus the principal's verbal go-ahead. Asked at the office bidding map, question 10.

2. How much pre-construction. Tom did takeoffs, bids, scopes, pricing, the budget pitch, and owner meetings. Connor is kept out of owner and bid meetings and prefers it. Asked at the office bidding map, questions 3 and 4.

3. Schedule starting point. Connor opens Slate's template in Instagantt. Tom clones a past project's schedule. Question 1.

4. Schedule build time. Connor: two to three hours. Tom: about a day. The principal: three to four hours at most. Question 2.

5. Post-review pass. Connor runs a second solo pass (4.2.3). Tom does that check during the build (4.1.1).

6. Owner-facing schedule. Tom describes a three-schedule model as what should happen. The principal confirms a padded five-to-ten milestone schedule; Connor never mentions one. Questions 5 and 15.

7. Schedule detail. Tom over-details on purpose so line items act as reminders. Connor pads whole-project durations by building size.

8. Tool habits. Tom avoids Asana in pre-construction and works by email. Connor keeps his to-do list on the Asana project. This matters for JobTread adoption.

Contradictions carried forward

• Superintendent owns the budget versus the principal does 95 to 100 percent of it. Read as the principal saying "budget" for "schedule". Office bidding map, questions 3 and 4.
• Pre-construction end state. Contract signed, permits in hand, or dirt moving; the principal says all three. This map ends at baseline set and groundwork starting. Office bidding map, question 1.
• Schedule sign-off versus schedule bonus. No sign-off exists while the principal wants a bonus tied to the schedule. See 4.2.4 and 4.1.4; questions 3, 4, and 11.
• Connor's runway. He says he has enough time between jobs, and also that he opened the current job weeks late. Both stand.
• Project setup ownership. Benali calls it a superintendent time sink; the principal says he creates each job's project himself. No activity added here. Question 6.
• Owner-facing schedule is padded and never updated. Nothing tells the owner the real completion date. Field Execution map, 2.3.4. Question 15.

Naming changes applied at condense

• "Create the schedule draft" became "Build out the job task list": the principal and Connor both say "build out".
• "Confirm the recurring obligations" became "Check off the recurring obligations": the source says "check".
• "Derive the owner-facing schedule from the baseline" became "Build the owner-facing schedule in the client-facing project": nobody said it is derived.
• Left unchanged: "Solicit and collect trade bids"; the dispute is who sends them, not whether it happens.

Assumptions to verify

• Principal means Patrick. No source states his title; he acts as owner and general manager. Owner means the client.
• Superintendent is the single role for both Tom and Connor.
• Office Manager appears only in shared takeoffs. The sources spell her surname two ways, so the map leaves the name out.
• The takeoff software is written as ConX under Houzz per the office session; Tom's transcript garbles it. Question 8.
• Unhappy paths are mostly absent from the sources. Three are now `gap` activities (3.1.3, 5.2.2, 2.2.4); a bid too high, an owner rejecting the budget, and a review ending in disagreement stay open.
• Phase 1 has no acceptance criteria because none exists. This is the workflow's headline finding.
• The Phase 5 handoff is the same person handing to himself today. It becomes real once one superintendent runs two jobs.

Quality checklist

• [x] No names in any Title, Role, or Sub-function.
• [x] Titles follow the naming rules; activities start with a verb and stay under 15 words.
• [x] Every activity has all six fields; handoff acceptance criteria are stated or marked UNKNOWN.
• [x] 18 numbered questions, one `?` each, every `[P#]` tag inside P1 to P5.

Questions consolidated to another map

• Entry trigger, the start-date confirmation at 1.1.2, and written acceptance criteria for the office-to-field handoff → asked at office-bidding-lifecycle-workflow question 9.
• Whether Phases 2 and 3 are superintendent work, who writes scopes, who builds the budget → asked at office-bidding-lifecycle-workflow question 3.
• The single end state for pre-construction (contract, permits, or dirt moving) → asked at office-bidding-lifecycle-workflow question 1.
• Whether a manufacturer installation kickoff should be committed for high-risk assemblies → asked at field-execution-workflow question 9 (see 5.2.3).