Problems › How Do We Get More Customers? › Construction & Trades
More customers is an outcome. The decision is which route to them you can afford to repeat without cutting job gross margin or backlog cover. What makes this harder for construction and trade contractors is structural: service work earns double the margin of projects and loses every staffing argument to liquidated-damages clauses. Any credible answer therefore has to hold job gross margin and backlog cover in the same view, which is exactly where most internal analysis stops because the two live in different systems.
More customers is an outcome. The decision is which route to them you can afford to repeat without cutting job gross margin or backlog cover. What makes this harder for construction and trade contractors is structural: service work earns double the margin of projects and loses every staffing argument to liquidated-damages clauses. Any credible answer therefore has to hold job gross margin and backlog cover in the same view, which is exactly where most internal analysis stops because the two live in different systems.
Almost every mechanical contracting firm can name several ways to book work and few can say which one pays back after field labour and change orders. That is the actual constraint: not a shortage of bids, but no evidence about which route to do more of.
The productive framing is route economics. For each plausible route — bid lists, referral from GCs, service calls, partner subs, search — what does it cost to secure one job, how long until the gross margin by job covers that cost, and can it be repeated without liquidated damages clauses eating the margin as volume rises.
Most routes fail the third test. They work at small volume because they depend on the owner’s network or attention, and quietly stop when either runs out.
These three together are the signature. One on its own usually points somewhere else.
✓ Backlog cover sits in the owner’s personal relationships with a handful of general contractors
✓ Gross margin by job is tracked only in aggregate, never tied to the source that brought the work
✓ Every lead source is being tried a little and none is being tested properly against service attach rate or change-order capture
The move that usually makes it worse. Running several lead sources at sub-scale simultaneously, which produces no conclusive result on any of them and costs more than testing one properly against job gross margin.
It is for you if you run or finance a contractor and growth depends on one person's relationships. It is the situation where the numbers are available but nobody has put them in an order that produces a decision.
It is not for you if Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.
Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.
Below is an excerpt from a real run of this analysis on a contractor. It is a sample profile rather than a customer, and it is unedited engine output — this is the format you get, on your own numbers.
The subject is Halloway Mechanical, a sample company profile used for testing rather than a customer — $180M revenue, mechanical contracting.
Excerpt from a real Percision run · Pricing Strategy · sample company profile
The move. Convert 34 already-licensed technicians into 20 three-year healthcare service contracts worth $50 k–$250 k each within 36 months.
| Investment required | $1.1–1.4 M over 36 months (dispatch software, 2 coordinators, 8 new technicians in Year 2) |
| Expected return | 3.8×–5.1× incremental gross profit on $1.1–1.4 M investment, calculated against the company’s actual $118 M revenue baseline. |
| Revenue, year 1 | $27–29 M service revenue |
| Revenue, year 2 | $31–33 M |
| Revenue, year 3 | $34–36 M |
| Exit criteria | Strategy should be abandoned if, within 18 months, fewer than 8 healthcare contracts ≥$50 k/year have been signed OR if gross margin on healthcare service falls below 28 % for two consecutive quarters. |
This is one move out of a full analysis. Read a complete report — every page, no email required.
This question routes to Go-to-Market & Commercial Strategy, one of 29 engagements the platform runs. For construction and trade contractors it works through job gross margin, backlog cover, change-order capture and service attach rate, then produces the sequence rather than a list of options — which move first, what it funds, and the observation that would say the sequence is wrong.
You watch the analysis get built before paying anything. Read a complete report here if you would rather see the depth first.
The one where your buyer already is and where you can pay back the acquisition cost within a period you can finance. That is business-specific, and the general answer is worth very little.
One that works, then a second. Running four at a quarter of the necessary budget reliably produces four inconclusive results and the belief that nothing works.
Your sales cycle plus one payback period, with enough volume to distinguish the result from noise. Setting that number in advance is what stops the decision being made by whoever is most persuasive.
Materially, yes. Service work earns double the margin of projects and loses every staffing argument to liquidated-damages clauses — which changes both the diagnosis and the order of the fixes. The metrics that decide it here are job gross margin, backlog cover, change-order capture, and an answer built on industry-general benchmarks will usually point at the wrong one first.
Less than most people expect. Your last twelve months of revenue and cost split the way you already split it, plus whatever you hold on job gross margin and backlog cover. The analysis is explicit about what it is assuming where your data stops, which is more useful than waiting for numbers you may never have.
Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.
Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.
Describe the situation in your own words and we will tell you which analysis answers it — before you sign up for anything.
Describe my situation →Prefer to skip ahead? Go straight to the free diagnostic.
English · Español · Deutsch · Português · Français · Italiano · Nederlands · 日本語 · 한국어 · 中文 · Polski · Svenska · Türkçe · العربية · Tiếng Việt · ไทย · हिन्दी · עברית