Your PMs didn’t get into construction to type. I take the typing off their plates.
Every general contractor I talk to describes the same week. A change order PDF comes in from a sub. Someone re-keys every line item into Procore or Autodesk, then checks the rates against a spreadsheet with mental math. A submittal drops. Someone downloads it, digs through the spec book, builds a cover sheet, sets up the Bluebeam session, invites reviewers by hand.
None of it requires construction knowledge. All of it consumes the people who have the most of it.
At a GC running 3 to 4% margin, this shows up in two places. The first is capacity: your best PMs can only carry so many projects, and every admin hour lowers that ceiling. The second is risk: rate discrepancies that slip through mental-math validation are margin leaving the job quietly, one line item at a time.
You can’t hire your way out. Experienced people are retiring faster than they’re being replaced, and every GC in the Pacific Northwest is fishing in the same shallow talent pool. The lever that’s left is making the PMs you have dramatically more effective.
Vendor PDFs processed in 60 seconds instead of 10 minutes. Every line item extracted, every rate validated against your rate cards, every discrepancy flagged before approval. This is the workflow that protects margin directly, and the one I usually demo first.
Change order automation →From 45 minutes to 13 per submittal, measured on 2,500+ real ones. Classification against your spec book, cover sheets, Bluebeam sessions, reviewer invites, all handled automatically. Your PM does the review. The system does everything before it.
Submittal automation →Procore to SharePoint. Viewpoint to Excel. Meeting minutes to action items. Wherever your people have become the bridge between systems that don’t talk, I build the actual bridge.
Data entry & integration →Everything above was built and measured on a completed $50M project: 2,500+ submittals and 1,000+ change orders processed against the full historical dataset, timed, and pressure-tested. The same workflows your teams run every day.
Read the case study →Not VC-backed. Not another login. Not a platform that asks your superintendents to change how they work. I embed with your team, map the workflows your people actually hate, and build a quiet automation layer underneath the tools you already use. A human approves every output. You own everything I build.
I sat with someone running ops at a Portland GC who walked me through their tool migration: they’d moved their entire operation from Procore to Autodesk hoping things would improve, only to watch the same pattern repeat. “They keep adding AI features,” he told me, “but my team’s still typing the same line items into the same system and hunting for workarounds.” A lot of GCs are living this. The software gets fancier. The grind doesn’t change.
No. The math works on volume of documents, not company size. A one-hour scoping call runs your actual numbers, and if the honest answer is that your volume doesn’t justify it yet, that’s the answer you’ll get.
Good. So am I, and they’re right to be. That’s why the pilot starts by measuring their current baseline, why a human approves every output, and why my fee is due only when I hit the documented time-savings goal. Skeptics make the best reference customers.
That’s not a problem because my approach isn’t tool-specific. I build against whatever your team actually uses. Whatever you build with, I can almost certainly work underneath it.
Scoping varies significantly by workflow and document volume: which is why every engagement starts with discovery before a number exists. What doesn’t vary: my fee is due only when I hit the documented time-savings goal. The guarantee is the constant. The scope sets the price.
Book a call. I’ll pick one workflow, measure your baseline, and show you the math on your own documents.