22
I used to think bigger crews always meant faster jobs, but a conversation with a superintendent in Nashville changed my mind
He told me that on a 50,000 square foot build-out, his 8-man crew finished two weeks ahead of a competitor running 14 guys. He said it came down to communication lag with the bigger team. Has anyone else seen a smaller crew outpace a bigger one on a tight timeline?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
simons281mo ago
...and that's the thing people forget, the law of diminishing returns kicks in hard on a job site. I've seen it myself where a 12-man crew spends half the morning just getting everyone on the same page, and the coffee breaks and smoke breaks multiply too. It's not just about the bodies, it's about the flow and who's actually swinging a hammer versus standing around waiting for a door to open. The Nashville super's right, sometimes a leaner crew with a solid foreman just runs smoother because every guy has to pull their weight. Your mileage may vary depending on the scope, but for a tight timeline, I'd take a tight crew every time.
3
grant_hart1mo ago
Wait, you're telling me I've been wrong about stacking bodies on a job site this whole time? Yeah ok, this honestly just changed my whole view on crew sizes.
2
thea_mitchell201mo ago
Yeah I was the same way, always figured more guys equals faster work until I saw a 6-man crew beat a 10-man crew on a store remodel. It really does make you rethink everything.
1