IN Brief:
- Surveyed construction professionals estimated that 18% of project time is spent searching for information.
- Respondents attributed 28% of project time to rework linked partly to outdated or disconnected data.
- Common data environment users reported greater accuracy, reduced miscommunication, and increased delivery capacity.
Procore and Dodge Construction Network have found that UK and Irish construction teams estimate they spend 18% of project time searching for information.
Based on a 240 day working year, that proportion is equivalent to 43 working days, or approximately 8.6 weeks, spent locating drawings, approvals, records, cost information, correspondence, and other project data.
The study surveyed 688 main contractors, subcontractors, and clients across the UK and Ireland. Respondents also estimated that 28% of project time is lost to rework, partly because teams lack current visibility or continue working from outdated drawings and documents.
Project and financial information commonly sits across enterprise resource planning systems, building information models, specialist platforms, email, spreadsheets, site records, and local document stores. Each system may serve a valid purpose, but disconnected ownership makes it difficult to determine which information is current and approved.
The research estimated that the combined effects of disconnected delivery can remove up to 25% of project value. Delayed decisions, unrecorded changes, incomplete evidence, duplicated administration, and work carried out against superseded information all contribute to that loss.
Respondents using a common data environment reported markedly better results. Ninety two per cent said data accuracy had improved, while the same proportion recorded fewer errors caused by miscommunication.
Almost all users said project information had become more visible and actionable, while 92% reported spending less time on manual administration and reconciliation.
Nearly half said the cost of additional work that could not be billed because of poor documentation or delayed approval had fallen by between 21% and 30%. Fifty seven per cent said they could manage between 21% and 30% more construction work without increasing headcount.
Information control extends into contractual performance
Construction’s digital problem is no longer defined by whether companies use software. Most medium and large projects already operate several platforms, but the value of those systems falls when responsibilities, approval routes, and records remain disconnected.
Data ownership has become more important as artificial intelligence and automated analysis move into project platforms. Work around construction data ownership and AI readiness has reinforced that automated outputs remain dependent on structured, current, authorised, and accessible information.
A common data environment cannot correct poor information by itself. Naming conventions, revision control, approval status, access permissions, retention periods, and individual responsibilities must be defined, otherwise a central platform may distribute errors more efficiently rather than remove them.
The commercial consequences are substantial because contractors need records to support valuations, extensions of time, loss and expense claims, variations, and compliance. Instructions or approvals retained only within individual inboxes can leave project teams unable to establish what was agreed, by whom, and on what date.
Building safety duties increase the importance of controlled information further. Product specifications, design changes, inspection records, installation evidence, commissioning results, and handover data may need to remain accessible long after practical completion.
Asset owners face the same issue during operation. Complete records reduce the need for intrusive surveys when equipment is replaced or spaces are altered, while missing information transfers cost and uncertainty into maintenance.
Site use remains a practical constraint because information platforms must work on mobile devices, accommodate intermittent connectivity, and allow users to find the relevant drawing or task without navigating an office oriented filing structure.
Training needs to cover project procedure rather than software functions alone. Teams must understand which information belongs in the system, who approves it, when a revision becomes valid, and how superseded material is removed from active use.
Interoperability creates another persistent difficulty. Clients, consultants, principal contractors, and subcontractors may each use different preferred platforms, and requiring the same information to be entered repeatedly can recreate the administrative burden that technology was intended to reduce.
The strongest outcomes in the survey came from connecting teams to the same controlled information rather than digitising isolated tasks. Contract procedures, project governance, technical standards, and software must therefore be designed as one operating process.
Experienced construction staff are in limited supply across planning, commercial management, engineering, supervision, and design coordination. Losing eight working weeks each year to information searches directs those skills away from decisions that influence programme, cost, quality, and safety.
Recovering even part of that time would not remove the industry’s wider productivity constraints, but it would release project teams from avoidable document handling. The practical test for any platform remains whether people can find dependable information quickly enough to make the correct decision before work proceeds.
