By Cotney Consulting Group. 

The real risk is signing the contract before the company understands the cost, cash, schedule and supply commitments required to deliver the project successfully.  

Canadian roofing contractors operate in a market where material prices, tariffs, freight costs and availability can change faster than many project contracts. The natural reaction is to focus on price: 

• What does the insulation cost today? 
• How long will the supplier hold the quote? 
• Will steel or aluminum increase again? 
• Can the contractor obtain the specified membrane? 

Those are important questions. But the price itself is not the greatest risk. The greater risk is committing to a fixed project value, completion date and material specification before understanding how the work will be purchased, financed and delivered. A price increase may reduce the contractor’s margin. A poorly structured commitment can eliminate it. 

Construction costs are still moving 

Canadian construction costs continue to rise, even if the rate of escalation is lower than during the pandemic's most disruptive years. Statistics Canada reported that non-residential building construction costs increased during the first quarter of 2026 and remained higher than one year earlier across the metropolitan areas it measures. Those figures represent broad construction conditions rather than roofing materials alone, but they confirm an important point. 

Costs are not standing still. Canadian contractors also continue to operate in a changing trade environment, where tariffs, quotas and import controls can affect the cost and availability of steel, aluminum and related building products. 

The Canadian Construction Association has continued to identify higher costs, geopolitical uncertainty and supply chain pressures as risks facing the industry. Contractors cannot control the global market. They can control when they accept its risk. 

The estimate is only a snapshot 

Every estimate is created at a particular moment. The labour rates reflect what the contractor knows today. The material quotations carry specific expiration dates. Freight assumptions are based on available routes and supplier information. Currency values may affect imported products. The project schedule assumes that materials will be available when required. The estimate may be accurate on the day it is completed yet inadequate by the time the contract is signed.  

That delay matters.  

A tender may remain under review for weeks or months. Scope discussions may continue. The owner may change the schedule. Product approvals may be delayed. A general contractor may request that the roofer hold pricing while other trades are still being finalized. 

During that time, the supplier’s quote may expire. The contractor should never assume that an old material quotation remains reliable merely because the project value has not changed. Before accepting the work, the estimator should update the material pricing, freight, lead times, availability and applicable taxes or tariffs. The contractor must compare the conditions that existed when the estimate was prepared with the conditions that exist when the commitment is made. That final review is not an administrative step. It is a risk decision. 

Quote validity must mean something 

Many roofing proposals include language stating that prices are valid for 15, 30 or 60 days. Too often, that language is treated as a formality. When the owner accepts the proposal after the validity period has expired, the contractor may still honour the original amount because the company does not want to lose the project. 

That decision should never be automatic. A quotation validity period protects the assumptions underlying the estimate. Once it expires, the contractor should have the right to re-verify costs and adjust the price where necessary. 

The company also needs a clear internal process:  

• Who monitors proposal-expiration dates? 
• Who requests updated supplier quotes? 
• Who has authority to extend pricing? 
• Who approves the additional risk? 
• How are changes communicated to the customer? 

Without those controls, salespeople or estimators may extend pricing informally without understanding what has changed. A contractor should not hold a multimillion-dollar material commitment based on a casual email promising that the price will remain good. A quotation is not the same as a confirmed allocation, production slot or delivery commitment. Contractors should understand exactly what the supplier has promised and what conditions remain outside the supplier’s control. 

The contract must allocate volatility risk 

A roofing contractor should not assume that every material increase can be passed through to the customer. The contract determines whether the contractor has any right to additional compensation. 

Before signing, the contractor should review how the agreement addresses material escalation, tariffs, government-imposed charges, taxes, duties, freight increases, product substitutions, delayed approvals, extended schedules, owner-caused delays, force majeure, changes in law, notice requirements and the evidence required to support additional costs. 

The language must be reviewed as a complete system. A material-escalation clause is of limited value if the contract also requires the contractor to provide a guaranteed price despite subsequent price increases. A tariff clause may not help if the contractor misses a strict written-notice deadline. A substitution provision may be ineffective if the owner can delay approval without extending the schedule. 

Qualified Canadian legal counsel should review material-escalation, tariff, delay and substitution clauses. Their effect will depend on the agreement, project type and applicable provincial or federal law. The project team’s responsibility is to understand the business consequence:  

• Who carries the risk if the material costs more? 
• Who carries the risk if it arrives late? 
• Who carries the risk if the specified product is unavailable? 

If the answer is always the roofing contractor, the project price must reflect that exposure. In some cases, the correct decision is not to increase the price. It is to decline the project because the schedule, contract terms or material uncertainty create more risk than the potential return justifies. 

Buying early creates a different risk 

Early purchasing can reduce escalation and availability risk. It can also create new problems. The contractor may need to fund materials months before they can be billed. Storage must be arranged. Products can be damaged, contaminated, stolen or used on another project. Warranties or shelf-life requirements may be affected. The design may change after the purchase has been made. 

The decision to buy early should therefore involve more than the estimator and supplier. Operations should confirm the project schedule. Finance should evaluate the cash requirement. The project manager should verify submittal and approval status. The manufacturer or supplier should confirm storage conditions and product limitations. The contract should establish when ownership transfers and who is responsible for stored materials. 

The contractor should also confirm whether stored materials can be billed and what documentation the customer requires. An early purchase may protect the material price while creating a cash-flow problem that is just as damaging. A profitable project can still strain the company if too much cash is tied up in materials that cannot yet be invoiced. 

Material availability can matter more than price 

A contractor may be able to absorb a moderate increase and still complete the work profitably. A material that does not arrive can stop the entire project. Availability risk should be evaluated during the estimating phase, not after the contract is signed. 

The contractor should know whether the product is regularly stocked, whether it must be manufactured specifically for the project, the realistic lead time, where it is manufactured, whether imported components are involved, whether the supplier has confirmed allocation, whether approved alternatives exist, what other work depends on the same product, how long the supplier will hold the material and what happens if the project schedule changes. 

Special colours, custom metal, tapered insulation, uncommon membrane thicknesses and project-specific accessories can create substantial exposure. A specification may permit equivalent materials, but that does not mean the substitution will be approved quickly. The contractor should identify acceptable alternatives before the original product becomes unavailable. Waiting until the project is already delayed puts the roofing company in the weakest possible negotiating position. 

Supplier relationships are a form of risk management 

Price matters, but the lowest quotation is not always the lowest-risk option. A dependable supplier provides more than material. The supplier provides accurate lead-time information, product knowledge, early notice of changes, documentation, delivery coordination and assistance when a problem occurs. Contractors should evaluate suppliers based on both performance and price:  

• Did the material arrive when promised? 
• Was the order complete? 
• Were substitutions communicated in advance? 
• Was damaged material resolved quickly? 
• Were price changes explained and documented? 
• Did the supplier assist with planning, or merely process the purchase order? 

Strong supplier relationships do not eliminate market volatility. They improve the contractor’s ability to see it coming. That visibility is valuable. A contractor may be able to change the estimate, revise the schedule or discuss an alternative with the customer when the warning arrives early. There are fewer options after the crew has mobilized. 

The purchase order must match the project commitment 

The contract with the customer is only one side of the risk. The purchase order issued to the supplier is the other. The roofing contractor should ensure that the purchase order clearly states the product and manufacturer, quantities, approved substitutions, price, taxes, freight, delivery dates, delivery location, storage requirements, required documentation, responsibility for damaged or incomplete shipments, conditions for price changes and cancellation or return provisions. 

Verbal understandings should be confirmed in writing. The supplier’s quotation should be attached or incorporated where appropriate. The contractor must also verify that the supplier’s terms do not transfer unexpected risks back to the roofing company. A customer contract may require delivery by a particular date while the supplier accepts no responsibility for delays. That gap belongs to the contractor unless it is managed before the order is placed. 

Estimate the consequence, not only the increase 

Material risk should not be measured solely by calculating the percentage price increase. The contractor must consider the full consequence. A delayed material shipment may create additional mobilization, equipment extensions, temporary protection, labour disruption, overtime, storage costs, schedule penalties, lost production on other projects, customer disputes and cash-flow pressure. 

Material delays also consume labour capacity. A crew held for a delayed project may be unavailable for work that is ready to proceed, while remobilization later can disrupt several additional schedules.\ A $10,000 material increase may be manageable. A four-week delay due to the same material may cost several times that amount once operational effects are factored in. 

Estimators and project managers need to think beyond the purchase price. They must ask what happens to the project if the material changes, arrives late or cannot be obtained. That is the real exposure. 

Risk must be reviewed before the signature 

Many roofing companies conduct a handoff meeting after the contract has been awarded. That meeting is necessary, but some decisions are already too late by then. High-risk projects should receive a pre-contract review. Estimating, operations, finance and leadership should examine material quotations and expiration dates, lead times and availability, tariff and currency exposure, supplier commitments, contract clauses, cash needed for early purchasing, storage requirements, approved alternatives, schedule assumptions, notice obligations and potential margin erosion. 

The purpose is not to slow down sales. It is to prevent the company from signing an agreement that operations cannot fulfil at the estimated cost. A project can look profitable on the estimate and still be a poor business decision. 

Discipline protects margin 

Roofing contractors cannot eliminate price volatility. They cannot control tariffs, international conflict, manufacturing interruptions or every transportation delay. They can decide how long they will hold a quotation. They can update supplier pricing before accepting the work. They can review the contract. They can identify alternative materials. They can assess the cash required for early purchases. They can document supplier commitments. They can refuse to accept risk without compensation. 

The market price is visible. The larger exposure is often hidden inside the schedule, contract, procurement plan and cash requirements. That is why the price is not the risk. The real risk is signing the contract before the company understands the cost, cash, schedule and supply commitments required to deliver the project successfully.

Por John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group, traducido por Alberto Torres. 

Conozca el riesgo ocupacional silencioso de la industria del roofing 

Pregúntele a un grupo de techadores veteranos cuáles son los mayores riesgos de seguridad que enfrentan y probablemente escuchará las mismas respuestas: caídas, condiciones climáticas, levantamiento de cargas pesadas, herramientas eléctricas, tráfico y electricidad. Sin embargo, rara vez alguien menciona un peligro al que ha estado expuesto casi todos los días de su carrera: el sol. 

A diferencia de la mayoría de los peligros en el lugar de trabajo, la exposición excesiva a la radiación ultravioleta (UV) no provoca una lesión inmediata. No hay un ruido fuerte, una luz de advertencia parpadeante ni un reporte de incidente al final de la jornada. En cambio, el daño se acumula lentamente, año tras año, muchas veces sin que nadie se dé cuenta hasta décadas después. 

Para los profesionales del roofing, los efectos de la exposición prolongada al sol merecen mucha más atención de la que normalmente reciben. Proteger a las cuadrillas no se trata únicamente de prevenir los accidentes de hoy. También significa proteger su salud dentro de veinte o treinta años. 

El techo es uno de los entornos de trabajo más exigentes 

Cualquiera que haya trabajado sobre un techo durante el verano sabe que existe una gran diferencia entre el pronóstico del tiempo y las condiciones reales de trabajo. Una temperatura ambiental de 90 grados puede sentirse mucho más alta sobre la superficie del techo. Las membranas blancas reflejan la radiación ultravioleta hacia arriba. Los techos metálicos intensifican el reflejo de la luz. Los materiales oscuros absorben el calor y lo irradian continuamente hacia los trabajadores. 

Los techadores no simplemente están bajo el sol. Están rodeados por él. 

La combinación de luz solar directa, radiación UV reflejada y altas temperaturas en la superficie crea uno de los entornos de trabajo al aire libre más exigentes de la construcción. La mayoría de las cuadrillas acepta estas condiciones como parte del trabajo. Sin embargo, esto no significa que debamos dejar de tomar medidas para reducir la exposición innecesaria. 

El daño ocurre lentamente 

Uno de los mayores desafíos de la exposición a los rayos UV es que sus efectos no son evidentes de inmediato. A diferencia de una caída o una cortadura, la exposición excesiva al sol generalmente no detiene el trabajo. Los trabajadores suelen considerar una quemadura solar como poco más que una molestia. En realidad, la exposición repetida a los rayos UV contribuye al envejecimiento prematuro de la piel, daños en los ojos y un aumento significativo del riesgo de cáncer de piel a lo largo de una carrera. 

La mayoría de los techadores no desarrolla estos problemas después de un verano. Los desarrolla después de cuarenta veranos. Por eso, este problema merece el mismo nivel de atención que cualquier otro riesgo ocupacional. 

La experiencia no brinda protección 

A menudo he escuchado a techadores con experiencia decir que ya no se queman porque se han "acostumbrado al sol." 

Desafortunadamente, así no funciona la radiación ultravioleta. La ausencia de una quemadura solar grave no significa que la piel no esté sufriendo daños. Cada día de exposición excesiva se suma al efecto acumulativo. De muchas maneras, los techadores veteranos podrían enfrentar un mayor riesgo a largo plazo simplemente porque han acumulado décadas de exposición. Los programas de seguridad deben reconocer que la salud ocupacional no consiste únicamente en prevenir las lesiones de hoy. También implica proteger carreras profesionales que pueden durar cuarenta o cincuenta años. 

La protección debe convertirse en una rutina 

Afortunadamente, reducir la exposición a los rayos UV no requiere procedimientos complicados. Al igual que con muchas medidas de seguridad, la constancia importa más que la complejidad. Las camisas ligeras de manga larga diseñadas para el trabajo, las extensiones de ala ancha para cascos de seguridad, los lentes de seguridad de calidad con protección UV, la protección para el cuello y la aplicación regular de protector solar ayudan a reducir la exposición acumulativa. 

Estos elementos no deberían considerarse accesorios opcionales para mayor comodidad. Deberían convertirse en componentes estándar del equipo de protección personal durante los trabajos al aire libre. Las mismas empresas que invierten en equipos de protección contra caídas también deberían invertir en proteger a sus empleados de riesgos ocupacionales cuyos efectos se desarrollan durante décadas, en lugar de segundos. 

La planificación hace la diferencia 

La planificación de las operaciones también puede ayudar a reducir la exposición innecesaria. Durante períodos de calor extremo y altos niveles de radiación UV, los gerentes de proyecto deben evaluar, cuando sea posible, el orden en que se realizan los trabajos. 

Las tareas que requieren una exposición prolongada en áreas abiertas con frecuencia pueden programarse para las primeras horas del día. Mientras tanto, los trabajos en áreas con sombra, la preparación del área de trabajo y del equipo o las tareas en interiores pueden realizarse durante las horas de mayor intensidad del sol por la tarde. 

Ningún contratista de roofing puede eliminar por completo la exposición al sol. Pero todos pueden manejarla de una manera más inteligente. Estas decisiones protegen a los trabajadores y, al mismo tiempo, pueden mejorar la productividad al reducir la fatiga relacionada con el calor. 

El liderazgo establece el estándar 

Una de las mayores influencias sobre la cultura de seguridad es aquello que los supervisores deciden enfatizar. Si los supervisores usan constantemente protección para el cuello, lentes de seguridad y protector solar, y además motivan a sus cuadrillas a hacer lo mismo, los empleados rápidamente comenzarán a ver estas prácticas como algo normal. Si los líderes ignoran los riesgos para la salud a largo plazo, las cuadrillas probablemente harán lo mismo. 

La cultura de seguridad no se construye únicamente a través de políticas escritas. Se construye mediante el ejemplo que los líderes de campo dan todos los días. El mensaje debe ser sencillo: 

Protegerse del sol no es una cuestión de comodidad. Se trata de asegurarse de que     el trabajo de hoy no provoque problemas de salud mañana. 

No olvide proteger sus ojos 

La piel no es la única preocupación. Años de exposición a la radiación ultravioleta también pueden contribuir al desarrollo de cataratas y otros problemas de la vista. Los techadores pasan innumerables horas observando superficies altamente reflectantes donde la luz del sol rebota directamente hacia sus ojos. Los lentes de seguridad de calidad que ofrecen protección contra los rayos UV deben considerarse una parte esencial del equipo de protección personal, no solamente una medida de protección contra impactos. Una visión clara no solo es importante para la salud a largo plazo. También es fundamental para desplazarse de manera segura cerca de los bordes del techo, identificar peligros y realizar un trabajo de calidad todos los días. 

Mirando más allá del trabajo de hoy 

Una de las características de un programa de seguridad sólido es su disposición para pensar más allá de las lesiones inmediatas. Las mejores empresas entienden que proteger a sus empleados significa considerar tanto los peligros de hoy como su salud en el futuro. 

Así como fomentamos el uso de protección auditiva antes de que ocurra una pérdida de audición, debemos fomentar la protección contra el sol antes de que el daño en la piel sea permanente. El objetivo no es simplemente terminar otro proyecto de manera segura. Se trata de ayudar a los trabajadores a disfrutar de carreras largas y saludables después de décadas en la industria del roofing. 

Reflexiones finales 

Los riesgos ocupacionales más peligrosos no siempre son aquellos que provocan lesiones inmediatas. A veces son aquellos a los que nos acostumbramos tanto que dejamos de notarlos por completo. 

Para los techadores, la exposición a la radiación ultravioleta es un riesgo. Cada día que se pasa sobre un techo deja huella. La mayoría de las veces no podemos ver el daño mientras ocurre, pero sus efectos se acumulan a lo largo de toda una carrera. 

Las mejores empresas de roofing entienden que la seguridad no se mide únicamente por los accidentes que no ocurrieron hoy. También se mide por la salud a largo plazo de las personas que han ayudado a construir el éxito de la empresa durante los últimos cuarenta años. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

Learn about roofing's silent occupational hazard.

Ask a group of veteran roofers about the biggest safety risks they face, and you'll probably hear the same answers. Falls. Weather. Heavy lifting. Power tools. Traffic. Electricity. Rarely does someone mention the one hazard they've been exposed to almost every day of their career — the sun. 

Unlike most jobsite hazards, excessive ultraviolet (UV) exposure doesn't cause an immediate injury. There is no loud noise, no flashing warning light and no incident report at the end of the day. Instead, the damage builds slowly, year after year, often without anyone realizing it until decades later. 

For roofing professionals, the effects of long-term sun exposure deserve far more attention than they typically receive. Protecting crews isn't just about preventing today's accidents. It's also about protecting their health twenty and thirty years from now. 

The roof is one of the most demanding work environments

Anyone who has spent time on a roof during the summer understands the difference between the weather forecast and actual working conditions. An air temperature of 90 degrees can quickly become much hotter on the roof surface. White membranes reflect ultraviolet radiation upward. Metal roofs amplify glare. Dark roofing materials absorb heat while continuously radiating it back toward workers. 

Roofers aren't simply standing in the sun. They're surrounded by it. 

The combination of direct sunlight, reflected UV radiation and elevated surface temperatures creates one of the harshest outdoor work environments in construction. Most crews accept those conditions as simply part of the job. That acceptance, however, shouldn't prevent us from reducing unnecessary exposure. 

The damage happens slowly 

One of the biggest challenges with UV exposure is that the effects aren't immediately obvious. Unlike a fall or a laceration, excessive sun exposure doesn't usually stop production. Workers often think of sunburn as little more than an inconvenience. In reality, repeated UV exposure contributes to premature skin aging, eye damage andsignificantly increases the risk of skin cancer over the course of a career.  

Most roofers don't develop these problems after one summer. They develop them after forty summers. That's why this issue deserves the same level of attention as any other occupational hazard. 

Experience doesn't provide protection 

I've often heard experienced roofers say they no longer burn because they've "gotten used to the sun."  Unfortunately, that's not how ultraviolet radiation works. The absence of a severe sunburn doesn't mean the skin isn't being damaged. Every day of excessive exposure adds to the cumulative effect. In many ways, veteran roofers may actually face greater long-term risk simply because they've accumulated decades of exposure. Safety programs should recognize that occupational health isn't only about preventing today's injuries. It's also about protecting careers that may span forty or fifty years. 

Protection should become routine 

Fortunately, reducing UV exposure doesn't require complicated procedures. Like many safety improvements, consistency matters more than complexity. Lightweight long-sleeved performance shirts, wide-brim attachments designed for hard hats, quality UV-blocking safety glasses, neck protection and regular sunscreen application all reduce cumulative exposure. 

These shouldn't be viewed as optional comfort items. They should become standard components of personal protective equipment during outdoor work. The same companies that invest in fall protection equipment should also invest in protecting employees from occupational hazards that develop over decades instead of seconds. 

Planning makes a difference 

Operational planning can also reduce unnecessary exposure. During periods of extreme heat and intense UV conditions, project managers should evaluate work sequencing whenever practical. Tasks requiring prolonged exposure in open areas can often be scheduled earlier in the day while shaded work, staging activities, equipment preparation or interior tasks are completed during peak afternoon conditions. 

No roofing contractor can eliminate sun exposure. Every contractor can manage it more intelligently. These decisions protect workers while often improving productivity by reducing heat-related fatigue. 

Leadership sets the standard 

One of the greatest influences on safety culture is what supervisors choose to emphasize. If foremen consistently wear neck protection, sunglasses and sunscreen while encouraging crews to do the same, employees quickly recognize these practices as normal. If leadership ignores long-term health risks, crews will usually do so as well.  

Safety culture isn't built through written policies alone. It's built by the daily example set by field leadership. The message should be simple. Protecting yourself from the sun isn't about comfort. It's about making sure today's work doesn't create tomorrow's medical problems. 

Don't forget your eyes 

Skin isn't the only concern. Years of ultraviolet exposure can also contribute to cataracts and other vision problems. Roofers spend countless hours looking across highly reflective roof surfaces where sunlight bounces directly into their eyes. Quality safety glasses that provide UV protection should be considered essential PPE, not merely impact protection. Clear vision isn't only important for long-term health. It's critical for safely navigating roof edges, recognizing hazards and performing quality workmanship every day. 

Looking beyond today's job 

One of the signs of a mature safety program is its willingness to think beyond immediate injuries. The best companies understand that protecting employees means considering both today's hazards and tomorrow's health. 

Just as we encourage hearing protection before hearing loss develops, we should encourage sun protection before skin damage becomes permanent. The goal isn't simply getting through another project safely. The goal is helping employees enjoy long, healthy careers after decades in the roofing industry. 

Final thoughts 

The most dangerous occupational hazards aren't always the ones that cause immediate injuries. Sometimes they're the ones we become so accustomed to that we stop noticing them altogether. 

For roofers, ultraviolet exposure is a hazard. Every day spent on a roof leaves an impression. Most of the time we can't see it happening, but the effects accumulate throughout an entire career. The best roofing companies understand that safety isn't measured only by the accidents that didn't happen today. It's also measured by the long-term health of the people who helped build the company's success over the last forty years. 

By Emma Peterson.

We’re counting down the 10 most-read stories from The Coffee Shops® to help you stay on top of the latest industry conversations.

Though it may be hard to believe, October is already coming to a close. And if your month has been anything like ours here at The Coffee Shops®, it’s been busy and hard to keep up with!

To make it a bit easier for our readers to catch up on the biggest industry news and stories from October 2026, we’ve collected our top ten articles published this past month.

As our readers move into the off-season, we’ve seen an uptick of interest in training and business development articles! On the training side, our top ten list includes an article about John Kenney of Cotney Consulting Group's upcoming two-day live classroom training workshop (November 17-18, 2026) and an article based on a conversation with Rick Johnson of Tremco CPG about partnering with manufacturers that back their products up with training.

On the business development side, Emma Peterson wrote three articles for The Coffee Shops® highlighting different ways contractors can set their businesses up for success. The first, which comes in at number 6 on our list, talks about four takeaways from a decade of RoofersCoffeeShop® Trends Reports. The other articles, which take spots 3 and 2, take a look at the state of the economy going into the last quarter of the year and at the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA)'s live LEGALCon event, respectively.

As for our top article of the month, it was all about "the certifications, technologies and best practices that help roofing professionals build more fire-resilient structures.”

Our top ten articles from October

10 - The business case for smarter construction recycling

9 - Extending building life starts with education and training

8 - Advocacy remains a roofing priority

7 - Building smarter roofers with expert training

6 - A decade of roofing trends

5 - Good project managers think three weeks ahead

4 - NWIR scholarship opens doors for future roofing leaders

3 - Going into the last quarter of 2026

2 - Set yourself apart from the competition at LEGALCon 2026

1 - Creating a more fire-safe future

By Emma Peterson.

Although roofing practices and regional challenges vary around the world, John Kenney explains why the industry's fundamental goals remain the same and how contractors can benefit from sharing their experiences.

In an episode of Roofing Road Trips®, Heidi J. Ellsworth sat down with John Kenney of Cotney Consulting Group to get his insights into the global roofing industry. John is an ideal guest for this discussion, as his 45+ years in the roofing industry have guided him in his work in both the United States and the United Kingdom.

John’s story starts with working in the field for a family-run roofing company in the Northeast of the U.S. From there, he worked his way up to estimating and managing projects for the same company. Today, he is the CEO of Cotney Consulting Group and “works with roofing contractors on estimating operational performance, project management, workforce development and more.” He is also very active in a variety of professional organizations, being a member of the International Federation for the Roofing Trades (IFD), National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) and the former Institute of Roofing.

When we asked him about what he’s seeing that is currently impact contractors on both sides of the pond, he highlighted labour challenges, estimating issues, margin protection and supply pressures. As he put it:

I think contractors in both markets are trying to find, develop and retain skilled people. I also think they're trying to estimate work accurately, protect the margins of the businesses and convert a good tender into a well-managed project. And as they’re trying to deal with that, they’re having to manage changing programs, incomplete information, material lead times, access relations and pressure from clients.

That’s not to say that all the issues that contractors face are universal, as things like hurricane season for U.S. contractors and handling apprenticeships in the U.K. are unique to their regions. But as John put it, “While the markets are very unique, at the end of the day, roofing contractors on both sides of the Atlantic are trying to complete quality work, the protect their people, serve their clients and operate profitable businesses.”

His advice for contractors on both sides of the pond to overcome these shared challenges? Work together. In John’s words, “I always have believed that you become better at what you do when you're willing to take a look beyond your own market and listen to how other professionals approach similar problems.”

Listen to the whole episode or Watch the recorded conversation to hear more of John’s expert insights.

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

The question isn't whether learning is taking place. The question is whether your organization is teaching the lessons that will make it stronger tomorrow than it is today.

One of the biggest misconceptions in business is that training only happens when people gather in a conference room, attend a seminar or complete an online course. In reality, training starts the moment someone walks through the door. Every conversation. Every decision. Every project meeting. Every jobsite. Every interaction between a foreman and a new crew member. Every response from a project manager. Every expectation an owner reinforces — or overlooks. 

Whether a company realizes it or not, it's teaching people how the business operates every single day. The only question is whether those lessons are intentional. I've spent much of my career helping roofing contractors improve operations, and one observation has stayed with me through every company I've worked with. People usually don't perform the way leadership expects. They perform the way leadership consistently demonstrates. That's an important distinction. 

I've walked into companies that proudly told me they had excellent procedures, detailed manuals and well-developed systems. Yet when I spent time with their teams, I found something entirely different. Employees weren't following the documented process because they had learned another one. 

They had learned how the company actually operated. Those lessons didn't come from a training manual. They came from:  

• Watching experienced employees 
• Seeing which standards leadership enforced and which ones quietly disappeared when business became busy. 
• Observing what happened when mistakes occurred, deadlines slipped or communication broke down. 

People pay far more attention to behavior than they do to policy. 

One lesson I've learned over the years is that culture isn't created by what a company says. It's created by what the company consistently accepts. If incomplete job documentation is tolerated, new employees learn documentation isn't really important. If project handoff meetings are frequently skipped, new project managers quickly conclude they're optional. If change orders are delayed until the end of the project, that becomes the accepted way of doing business. Nobody needs to explain those expectations. People learn them simply by working there. 

I've also noticed that new employees become remarkably good observers. Before they're confident enough to make decisions on their own, they're watching everyone around them. 

• How does the superintendent handle pressure? 
• How does the project manager communicate with the customer? 
• How does the estimator respond when production questions arise? 
• How does the owner react when problems develop? 

Those observations become the foundation of their professional habits. Long before they're officially trained, they're already learning. That's why experienced leaders understand they're always setting an example, even when they don't realize it. 

A foreman who begins every morning with a clear plan is teaching preparation. A project manager who follows through on commitments is teaching accountability. An estimator who takes the time to explain production assumptions is teaching collaboration. An owner who remains calm during difficult situations is teaching confidence. Those lessons become part of the company's culture because people naturally repeat what they experience most often. 

Unfortunately, the opposite is equally true. I've seen organizations unintentionally train employees to accept constant firefighting as normal. They learned that planning could wait because someone would eventually solve the problem. They learned that communication wasn't necessary until something went wrong. They learned that documentation could always be completed later. Over time, those habits became the company's operating system. No one designed it that way. It simply developed through repetition.  

One observation that has stayed with me throughout my career is that companies don't drift toward excellence. They drift toward whatever behaviors leadership reinforces most consistently. That's why culture requires far more than good intentions. It requires consistency. 

One thing I admire about exceptional roofing companies is that they recognize teaching doesn't stop after orientation. Every project becomes an opportunity to develop people. Job reviews aren't simply discussions about profit and loss. They're learning sessions. Project meetings aren't just about schedules. They're opportunities to improve communication and decision-making. 

Even mistakes become valuable if leadership takes the time to explain what happened and how similar situations can be avoided in the future. That approach creates something every contractor wants, but very few intentionally build. Institutional knowledge. Knowledge that doesn't exist in one person's head. Knowledge that's shared, reinforced and passed from one generation of employees to the next. 

I've often said that one of the greatest risks facing any roofing company isn't losing a customer. It's losing decades of experience because no one took the time to pass it on. Strong companies don't allow that to happen. They create environments where experienced people teach naturally because leadership values learning as much as production. 

Another lesson I've carried with me over the years is that training isn't measured by how many classes employees attend. It's measured by how they perform when no one is watching. That's when habits reveal themselves. That's when culture becomes visible. 

Technology has created tremendous opportunities to improve learning. Online training, digital resources and mobile access have made education more available than ever before. Those tools are valuable, and they should absolutely be part of a company's development strategy. 

But technology doesn't replace leadership. People still learn most effectively by watching experienced professionals make decisions, solve problems and demonstrate the standards expected throughout the organization. That's how confidence is built. That's how judgment develops. That's how future leaders emerge. 

The strongest roofing companies I've worked with understand that every day is a training day. Every conversation either strengthens the culture or weakens it. Every decision either reinforces expectations or quietly changes them. Every leader is teaching something. Whether they intended to or not. Because your roofing company is always training someone. 

By John Kenney.  

Roofing companies don't improve simply because people work harder. They improve because leadership helps people focus on what matters most. 

Walk into almost any roofing company during the busy season, and you'll see the same thing. Phones are ringing. Estimators are turning around bids. Project managers are juggling multiple jobs. Crews are moving from one project to the next. Owners are answering questions before finishing the last conversation. From the outside, it looks productive. Everyone is busy. The problem is that being busy has never guaranteed that the business is moving in the right direction. 

Over the years, I've noticed that some of the hardest-working roofing companies I've encountered weren't necessarily the most profitable. They had talented people, good reputations and plenty of work. Yet they constantly felt like they were trying to catch up. At the same time, I've worked with companies that seemed noticeably calmer. They weren't working less. They weren't less committed. In many cases, they were actually growing faster. The difference wasn't effort. It was focus.  

One lesson this industry has reinforced throughout my career is that efficiency and effectiveness are not the same thing. Efficiency is about doing work quickly. Effectiveness is about making sure you're doing the right work in the first place. Those two ideas often get confused. 

A project manager can answer fifty emails in a day and still avoid the one conversation that would have prevented next week's scheduling problem. An estimator can produce more bids than anyone else in the office but spend valuable time pursuing projects that never fit the company's strengths. An owner can attend meetings from morning until evening without making a single decision that moves the company forward.Everyone was efficient. Very little was effective. 

I've learned that roofing companies don't usually become overwhelmed because people are lazy. They become overwhelmed because everyone is busy responding to work instead of intentionally directing it. That distinction changes everything. Think about how often interruptions shape the day. A customer calls with an urgent question. A supplier needs clarification. A foreman encounters an unexpected condition. Accounting needs information. Another opportunity to bid arrives. Every one of those situations deserves attention. But not every one deserves immediate attention. 

One of the characteristics I've consistently seen in exceptional leaders is their ability to distinguish between activity and priority. They don't simply ask, "What needs to be done?" They ask, "What matters most right now?" That question sounds simple. In practice, it's incredibly difficult. Especially in roofing. 

Construction has a way of making everything feel urgent. Weather changes. Deliveries move. Customers call. Crews need answers. Without discipline, the loudest issue quickly becomes the most important one — even when it shouldn't.  

I've walked enough jobs to know that some of the biggest operational problems started because leadership became consumed by the urgent while quietly neglecting the important. Planning meetings were postponed.Project reviews were delayed. Training was pushed to another week. Communication became shorter. Documentation waited until tomorrow. No one intended for those things to happen. Everyone was trying to survive the day. Eventually, the day started running the business instead of leadership running the day. 

Another observation that's stayed with me is that effective leaders become very comfortable saying no. Not because they don't care. Because they understand that every yes carries a cost. Every unnecessary meeting consumes time that could have been spent coaching a project manager. Every project accepted without available management capacity affects every existing customer. Every interruption accepted without question steals attention from something more important.  

Time is one of the few resources a roofing company cannot purchase more of. The strongest leaders protect it carefully. I've often told owners that one of the most valuable exercises they can perform is reviewing how leadership spent the previous week. Not what was accomplished. How time was invested. Did most decisions move the business forward? Or did leadership spend another week reacting to whatever appeared next? The answer usually explains a great deal about the company's operational performance. 

Technology has certainly improved efficiency. Estimating software is faster. Project management platforms organize information better. Artificial intelligence is helping contractors complete tasks that once requiredsignificant manual effort. Those are meaningful advancements.  

But technology doesn't determine effectiveness. It simply allows companies to perform existing processes more quickly. If the wrong priorities are driving the work, faster technology helps organizations become more efficient at heading in the wrong direction. That's an uncomfortable thought. It's also an important one. 

The companies I've admired most throughout my career weren't the busiest. They weren't the loudest. They weren't constantly celebrating how much work they had under contract. What impressed me was something much simpler. They seemed to know exactly where leadership belonged. Owners focused on leading. Project managers focused on managing. Foremen focused on execution.  

Everyone understood their priorities. Because priorities were clear, decisions became clearer. Because decisions became clearer, operations became more predictable. And because operations became more predictable, profitability usually followed. 

One lesson I've never forgotten is that roofing companies don't improve simply because people work harder. They improve because leadership helps people focus on what matters most. That's effectiveness. Efficiency makes companies faster. Effectiveness makes them better. The strongest roofing companies understand they need both. But if forced to choose between the two, they'll always prioritize effectiveness. Because moving quickly in the wrong direction has never been a winning strategy. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group.  

In roofing, companies rarely lose their edge overnight. More often...they slowly drift away from it. 

One of the biggest challenges facing successful roofing companies isn't a lack of opportunity. It isn't finding work, investing in technology or even attracting good people. It's maintaining the operational discipline that made them successful in the first place. 

I've watched companies grow from a handful of employees into organizations with multiple crews, several project managers and an impressive backlog of work. From the outside, they looked like success stories. Revenue was increasing. New customers were coming in. The business appeared healthy. 

Then, almost without anyone noticing, things started to change. Project reviews became less consistent. Communication between departments became more informal. Jobsite visits happened a little less often. Purchasing decisions became rushed. Documentation slipped. Follow-up conversations that once happened automatically were postponed because everyone was busy. 

None of those changes seemed significant at the time. Together, they changed the company. 

I've come to believe that roofing companies rarely lose operational control because of one major event. They lose it through operational drift. Operational drift doesn't announce itself. It doesn't send an email or show up during a management meeting. It happens quietly. Processes that were once followed every time become "most of the time." Meetings that were once considered essential become optional. Once non-negotiable standards slowly become suggestions. The company continues moving forward, but the discipline that built its reputation begins fading in small, almost invisible ways.  

That's what makes operational drift so dangerous. It feels harmless. One thing I've learned over the years is that people rarely wake up and decide to lower their standards. Good people don't intentionally create average companies. Operational drift happens because everyone is trying to solve today's problem. When the phones are ringing, projects are behind schedule and customers need answers, it's easy to convince yourself that you'll get back to the process later. The problem is that "later" tends to become permanent. 

I've seen estimating reviews disappear because everyone was focused on bidding more work. I've seen project handoff meetings shortened until they eventually disappeared altogether. I've watched job cost reviews become quarterly discussions instead of the conversations that used to happen after every project. None of those decisions were made because leadership stopped caring. They were made because everyone believed they were saving time. In reality, they were borrowing problems from the future. 

One observation has stayed with me throughout my career. Strong operations aren't built on extraordinary decisions. They're built on ordinary disciplines repeated consistently. 

The daily habits that don't seem exciting are usually the ones protecting profitability. A project manager who follows up when they said they would. A superintendent who completes documentation before leaving the jobsite. An estimator who communicates assumptions instead of expecting others to figure them out. An owner who insists on reviewing projects even when the company is busy. 

Those aren't extraordinary actions. They're operational disciplines. The strongest companies protect them because they understand something many organizations overlook. Consistency compounds. So does inconsistency. 

Another mistake I see is assuming growth automatically means improvement. Growth creates opportunity, but it also magnifies weaknesses. A process that worked with two project managers may begin breaking down with six. Communication that felt natural in a twenty-person company becomes much more difficult when the organization reaches one hundred employees. Responsibilities become less clear. Decisions take longer.Information travels through more people. Without intentional structure, operational drift accelerates. That's why I often tell contractors that growth doesn't create operational problems. It exposes the ones that were already there. 

I've also noticed that operational drift usually appears long before financial reports reveal it. Margins slowly become less predictable. Projects require more management attention. Crews spend more time waiting for decisions. Customers begin asking more questions. Leadership feels busier than ever but struggles to explain why. Those are operational warning signs. The financial results arrive later. 

The companies that avoid operational drift have something in common. They periodically stop and ask themselves difficult questions: 

• Are we still following the processes that made us successful?  
• Have our standards changed without us realizing it? 
• Are we solving problems — or simply becoming better at living with them? 

Those conversations require honesty. They also require leadership. 

One lesson I've carried with me over the years is that companies don't stay excellent by accident. Operational excellence has to be protected. Every process. Every expectation. Every standard. Not because people can'tbe trusted. Because organizations naturally drift toward whatever leadership consistently reinforces. 

That's why culture matters. Culture isn't built by mission statements hanging on a wall. It's built by what leadership chooses to inspect, discuss and expect every single day. If leadership stops paying attention to the details, eventually everyone else will too.  

The encouraging news is that operational drift is completely reversible. It doesn't require rebuilding the company. It requires reconnecting the organization with the disciplines that made it successful in the first place.Sometimes that means slowing down long enough to evaluate how work is actually being performed. Sometimes it means having conversations that should have happened months earlier. Sometimes it means simply refusing to accept "good enough" where excellence once existed. 

The longer I've worked in this industry, the more convinced I've become that successful roofing companies don't outperform their competitors because they're constantly changing. They outperform them because they protect the habits, standards and operational disciplines that continue to produce predictable results year after year. 

Because in roofing, companies rarely lose their edge overnight. More often...they slowly drift away from it. 

By John Kenney, Cotney Consulting Group. 

An effective job-cost review turns a financial result into useful operating information. 

A roofing contractor can complete a project, issue the final application for payment and close the file without ever fully understanding what the work actually taught the business. That is a missed opportunity. Every completed project contains information that can improve the next tender. It shows how labour performed, whether material quantities were accurate, how long plant remained on hire, where access affected productivity and which assumptions proved realistic. 

The problem is that many businesses review project cost only to determine whether the job made or lost money. That matters, but it is not enough. A final margin tells the contractor the result. It does not always explain why the result occurred.  

A proper job-cost review should connect the financial outcome to the way the project was estimated, planned and delivered. When that connection is made consistently, completed projects begin improving future tenders. Without it, the estimating team may continue using the same rates and assumptions even when actual performance has changed. 

The final margin is only the starting point 

The first question in a project review is often simple.  

Did the project achieve the expected margin? 

That question is important, but the answer should lead to a much deeper discussion. A project may have achieved its target overall while performing poorly in several areas. A profitable variation may have hidden a labour overrun, a favourable material purchase may have covered extended plant hire or a strong final account settlement may have made the project appear operationally better than it was. 

The opposite can also happen. A well-managed project may produce a disappointing result because the original tender was too low, the programme changed or the contractor accepted a commercial condition that created additional cost. 

Looking only at the final percentage can therefore give the business the wrong lesson. The review should separate the result into its main parts and examine how labour, materials, plant, subcontract costs, supervision, delays and variations compared with the original allowance. This turns a financial result into useful operating information. 

Labour needs to be reviewed in detail 

Labour is usually one of the highest controllable costs on a roofing project, but it is often reviewed too broadly. The report may show that the project used 1,200 labour hours against an allowance of 1,000. That identifies an overrun, but it does not explain it.  

The business must understand where the additional 200 hours were used. Were production rates lower than expected? Did the team spend more time distributing materials? Was access restricted? Did the project require additional visits? Were operatives waiting for other trades? Did the client change the sequence? Was more preparation required than the tender allowed? Did quality issues create remedial work? 

The answer matters because each cause requires a different response. If the original production rate was unrealistic, future estimates should change. If the overrun was caused by site disruption, the tender process should identify and qualify that risk more clearly. If the team lacked experience with the system, training or supervision may need improvement. If additional work was completed without recovery, the variation process needs attention. 

The business should never adjust a labour rate simply because one project exceeded the estimate. It should adjust the rate when the evidence shows that the underlying assumption no longer reflects actual performance. 

Production rates should come from real work 

Many estimating systems rely on standard production rates built over time. Those rates are useful, but they should not become permanent simply because they are familiar. Roofing work changes. Materials change, installation methods improve, packaging and delivery arrangements evolve, site restrictions increase and the workforce changes. A rate that was realistic five years ago may no longer reflect the way projects are delivered today. Job-cost reviews provide the evidence needed to keep those rates current. 

If a particular system repeatedly takes longer than the estimating allowance, the contractor should investigate why. The issue may be the rate itself, but it may also be that the rate does not account for details, access or project type. Installing a large uninterrupted area is different from working around numerous rooflights, penetrations and changes in level. A new-build project with planned access is different from a refurbishment project on an occupied building. A continuous workface is different from several small phased areas. 

The estimating database should reflect those differences where practical. The goal is not to create a separate rate for every possible condition. It is to prevent the business from applying one general assumption where the work consistently behaves differently. 

Material review should include quantity, price and waste 

Material cost is another area where the final invoice total does not tell the whole story. The contractor should compare estimated quantities with actual usage and consider whether the measured quantities, packaging assumptions and waste allowances were realistic. 

Did the project require more laps, cuts or detailing than expected? Was material damaged? Were partial packs or rolls left unused? Did changes in sequence create additional waste? Were split orders or urgent purchases required? 

The review should also consider purchase price. The estimate may have used a supplier quotation that expired before the order was placed. A substitute product may have been required. Additional carriage may have been paid, or smaller orders may have reduced purchasing leverage. 

These differences should not automatically be treated as estimating errors. The purpose is to understand whether the original allowance remains realistic and whether procurement decisions affected the result. Waste deserves particular attention because it is often hidden inside total material usage. A project may appear to have consumed the expected quantity overall while one detail or roof area generated considerably more waste than planned. That lesson should return to estimating. 

Plant duration should be compared with the programme 

Plant costs are usually linked closely to project duration. If the programme extends, plant hire often extends with it. A job-cost review should compare the planned duration of cranes, hoists, telehandlers, scaffolding, mobile elevating work platforms and other access equipment with the actual duration. 

If the equipment remained on site longer, the business should understand why. Was the original programme too short? Did access begin later than expected? Was the work resequenced? Did another trade delay release of the roof area? Was the equipment hired too early? Could it have been released sooner? Did the contractor need to return later because the work was completed in phases? 

These questions improve both estimating and project planning. The review should also consider associated costs such as delivery, collection, fuel, operators, permits and repeated mobilisation. The weekly hire rate is rarely the complete financial effect. 

Supervision and management time should not disappear into overhead 

Project management and supervision are often underestimated because some of the cost is carried within company overhead. That does not mean the project did not consume the resource. A contracts manager may spend additional weeks coordinating a delayed project. A site supervisor may remain in place longer than planned. Senior management may become involved in commercial disputes, client communication or recovery planning. 

Those hours have value. If one project demands far more management time than expected, the business should understand why. Was the project inherently complex? Was the tender allowance too low? Did poor information create repeated questions? Did weak site reporting require more office involvement? Did the client’s management structure increase meeting and reporting demands? Did commercial problems require senior intervention? 

Not every hour needs to be charged directly to the project for the review to be useful. The contractor should still recognise which projects consume disproportionate management attention. That information can influence future pricing, staffing and project selection. 

Variations can distort the lesson 

Variations are an important part of the final project result, but they can make the underlying operating performance harder to see. A project may finish above its original margin because additional work was priced favourably. That does not necessarily mean the base contract performed well.  

The contractor should separate original-scope performance from variation performance where possible. Did the tendered work achieve the expected margin? Did variations recover their full labour, material, plant and management cost? Were any changes completed but not valued? Did the business carry the cost for too long? Was additional work recorded clearly enough to support recovery? 

This distinction prevents profitable changes from hiding weaknesses in the original delivery plan. It also shows whether the variation process itself is working. A variation that creates revenue but disrupts the base programme may still reduce overall project efficiency, so both the commercial value and operational effect should be reviewed. 

Interim review and final review serve different purposes 

A detailed final review is valuable, but contractors should not wait until completion to look at cost performance. If labour is already exceeding the allowance halfway through the project, the business needs to know then. If material usage is higher than expected, the team should investigate before placing the final orders. If plant is likely to remain on site longer, management should understand the reason while options still exist. 

Interim reviews help protect the current project. Final reviews improve the next one. A monthly or milestone-based review can provide enough information to identify trends without creating an excessive administrative burden. The frequency should reflect the size, duration and risk of the project. The important point is that cost information must reach the people who can influence the outcome. A report that arrives after every decision has been made is accounting history. Useful job costing supports current management and future estimating. 

The review must include the people who know what happened 

Financial reports alone cannot explain project performance. The estimator understands how the allowance was built. The project manager knows which conditions changed. The site supervisor understands what affected labour and sequence. Procurement knows what happened with suppliers and lead times. The commercial team understands variation recovery and payment. 

A useful job-cost review brings those perspectives together. This does not require a large meeting or an elaborate presentation. It requires the right people to compare what was planned with what occurred and agree on the lesson. 

If labour exceeded the estimate, the site team should explain the operating conditions. If material cost increased, procurement should explain whether the cause was price, quantity, timing or delivery. If the programme extended, the project manager should identify the events that drove the delay. If recovery was weak, the commercial team should explain whether the issue was records, notice, valuation or entitlement. Without that discussion, the business risks changing the wrong thing. 

Lessons must reach the estimating system 

A project review has limited value if the conclusions remain in meeting notes. The lesson must change something. A production rate may need to be revised, a waste factor adjusted, a plant allowance increased for a particular type of project or a tender checklist expanded to address access, phasing or occupied premises. A supplier lead time may need updating, a recurring detail may need a separate labour allowance or a qualification may need to be strengthened. 

The change should be specific and assigned to someone. Otherwise, the same lesson will appear again on the next project. This is where many contractors lose the benefit of job costing. They identify the problem but do not update the estimating tools, procedures or assumptions that created it. The meeting ends, the project is archived and the next tender begins from the same information as before. That is not continuous improvement. 

Not every result should change the rate 

Job-cost reviews must also be used carefully. One unusual project should not automatically rewrite the estimating system. A severe access restriction, client-driven delay or unexpected condition may make the project unrepresentative of normal work.  

The contractor should look for patterns. If the same issue appears across several projects, the evidence is stronger. If one system repeatedly uses more labour, one detail regularly creates excess waste or one project type consistently requires more supervision, the estimating model should reflect that experience. 

The review should distinguish between a one-off event, a project-specific condition, a repeated operating problem and an estimating assumption that is no longer accurate. That distinction prevents overreaction and keeps the estimating system grounded in reliable information. 

Good data supports better project selection 

Job-cost reviews can also help the contractor understand where the business performs best. A particular type of project may appear attractive by contract value but consistently demand excessive management time. Another may generate strong margins but create heavy cash-flow pressure. Some clients may provide repeat work with predictable conditions, while others create frequent change and delayed recovery. 

The business should understand which systems, project sizes and client relationships fit its workforce and management structure. Not every available project is the right project. A contractor that understands its actual performance can pursue work where its experience and operating system create an advantage. 

Job costing should create a learning cycle 

The most valuable job-cost system is not the one with the most reports. It is the one that changes future decisions. The tender establishes the expected cost and operating plan. The project produces actual results. Interim reviews help protect the work while it is still in progress. The final review explains the differences and converts them into better estimating assumptions. 

That cycle should continue throughout the life of the business.  

• Estimating informs delivery. 
• Delivery creates evidence. 
• Evidence improves estimating. 

When that connection is strong, the contractor becomes more accurate over time. Labour allowances become more realistic, procurement risks become easier to identify, and project teams begin with better information. When that connection is weak, the business repeats the same assumptions and hopes for a different result. A job-cost review should do more than confirm whether the project made money. It should make the next tender better. 

Learn more about Cotney Consulting Group in their Coffee Shop Directory or visit www.cotneyconsulting.com.

About the author 

John Kenney has more than 45 years of experience in the roofing industry. His career has included every level of roofing operations, from field installation and estimating through executive leadership. He is CEO of Cotney Consulting Group, a partner member of the International Federation for the Roofing Trades and earned the MIoR designation from the former Institute of Roofing in the United Kingdom. He works with roofing contractors to improve estimating, project management, operational performance, leadership and profitability. 

By Emma Peterson. 

Woodchuck.ai rethinking how jobsite waste is handled in order to support sustainability goals while creating measurable financial benefits. 

Sustainability has become a key talking point for contractors. As John Kenney, the CEO of Cotney Consulting Group put it, “Not that long ago, sustainability discussions were limited to a handful of projects...Today, that conversation has become much more mainstream. Building owners are asking about energy efficiency, architects are exploring sustainable design options and municipalities are increasingly adopting standards that encourage greener building practices.” And as this demand for more sustainable practices rises, it is crucial that contractors not only consider the sustainability of the products they are installing, but also the sustainability of their building practices. 

This idea, of building more sustainable practices in addition to products, is what Todd Thomas and the team at Woodchuck.ai focuses on. We got the chance to learn more about their work and its benefits on an episode of Contractor Outlook™ we recorded with Todd. 

What Woodchuck.ai does is bring dumpsters to jobsites. But rather than your typical, throw everything and the kitchen sink into the same place, these dumpsters are designed to be used for material sorting. In fact, they utilize cameras and artificial intelligence software to help ensure that materials are separated properly. Then, when a dumpster is full, the Woodchuck.ai team can collect it, and take that sorted material, whether that’s asphalt products or wood products, and recycle it easily because it’s already sorted. 

Todd described how this separating and recycling of materials is such a good thing for sustainability, sharing, “We have a finite number of landfills across the United States and if you look at these landfills, they're often 30-40% wood by volume. And that wood is coming from things like construction site mixed dumpsters.” He went on, “So if we can get crews to sort their materials, we can keep that wood out of the landfill, extend the life of that landfill and get additional value out of that wood all at the same time.”  

And the best part of this whole set up? Not only can contractors feel good about their impact on the environment, it also can give them financial benefits. Todd explained:  

It might seem like a big change to start sorting materials, but it’s something that actually is pretty easy after you do it once and comes with benefits beyond sustainability. For example, we just partnered with a contractor who worked on Ford’s EV battery factory in Marshall, Michigan. Over the course of that project, we diverted 10,000 tons of wood from the landfills and instead were able to turn it into 10,000 megawatts of clean electricity. In addition to being an incredible win for sustainability, that diversion also returned a savings to the contractor of $1.6 million!  

With that kind of savings, it’s hard to deny the positive impact the Woodchuck.ai team is providing for both the environment and contractors in the field. As Todd put it, “If we can extend the life of our existing landfills by making sure that valuable materials don't get buried there, it's a win for everybody. It's a win for the contractor, it's a win for the community and it's a win for whoever was going to have the next landfill next to them.” 

Listen to the whole episode or Watch the recorded episode to learn more about Woodchuck.ai.