Who does what in a construction project? Roles and responsibilities explained

Which roles make up the internal construction team?

An internal construction team may include an operations manager, project manager, construction estimator, construction project coordinator, planner, site manager, tradespeople and administration staff. Not every business has eight separate positions for these roles. One person may fulfil several roles, while a larger organisation may divide one role among several people.

Use the allocation below as a starting point for discussion, rather than a universal job description or a statement of authority.

The boundaries overlap. The BOB training course for construction estimators/project coordinators combines estimating, preparation, supervision and communication, for example. BOB also describes preparation, scheduling and information flows for the site manager in larger construction projects. Agree how you divide the work, rather than inferring a firm boundary from the job title.

What does the project manager do?

The project manager maintains coordination and organises decisions and handover. They need to know what deviates from the brief, what consequences this has and who takes the next step. That does not mean they personally assess every technical detail or may accept every commercial change.

Document their authority specifically. Which choices may the project manager make on behalf of the business? Which matters go to senior management, the client or a specialist? Who covers during absences? A broad task such as ‘monitor the project’ does not answer those questions.

De Woub’s guide for project managers covers communication and actions around projects. That product role does not establish that the user also has formal authority to make every project decision.

What does the construction project coordinator do, and what does the site manager do?

The construction project coordinator generally focuses on prerequisites for construction. The site manager organises and controls daily work on site. Both may prepare and plan; the key difference lies in their information needs and the handover between them.

For example, the construction project coordinator needs to know which drawing applies, which delivery is confirmed and which assessment is still missing. The site manager needs to know what can happen on site as a result, which conditions remain outstanding and who assesses a deviation.

Illustrative example: an alternative component is proposed because the original is unavailable in time. The construction project coordinator gathers the information, the designated specialist assesses suitability and the authorised person handles the implications for the brief. The site manager organises the next steps only on the basis of the current instruction. This is not a fixed allocation for every project, but shows why ‘sort out the component’ is too vague.

Make handover work in both directions. Site teams report a deviation with the necessary context; the office feeds back the checked outcome. Read the separate guide to communication between office and site.

How Woub helps each role with handover

The table describes working arrangements, rather than a fixed app permissions matrix. The setup determines who participates in which project and chat. For administration, read the specific example in from additional works to invoicing.

Which external parties are involved?

External parties may include the client, subcontractors, suppliers, designers, advisers, construction project supervisors, contract administrators acting for the client, site inspectors and Dutch building quality assurers. Their briefs and authority differ. Two people who both visit a construction site need not have the same role.

An architect assessing a design detail is not automatically the person who accepts additional costs on the client’s behalf. A supplier offering an alternative has not automatically established its suitability across the project.

Nor is a construction project supervisor automatically the same as a client’s contract administrator, site inspector or Dutch building quality assurer. Look at the actual brief and authority. The Woub page for construction project supervisors describes how project agreements can be tracked; it does not determine formal authority to act as a representative.

The IPLO describes the independent role of the Dutch building quality assurer. Where this system applies, that role cannot be equated with internal quality control. Arrange safety roles separately too. Arboportaal describes coordination and responsibilities around the V&G-plan; each employer retains their own obligations. A project matrix or app does not take these over.

Who is responsible for decisions, tasks and formal approval?

Use a RACI matrix to make the allocation of work visible for each specific activity. Also check which formal approval is needed. RACI describes responsibility and involvement; it does not replace a contract, instruction or delegated authority.

De Association for Project Management describes RACI with four roles:

• R — Responsible: carries out the action or organises its implementation.

• A — Accountable: is answerable for the outcome of that activity.

• C — Consulted: is specifically consulted before or during the work.

• I — Informed: receives the relevant progress update or outcome.

As a working agreement, choose one clearly identified A for each defined activity. R and A may be the same person in some situations. If one row contains different technical and commercial decisions, split it. An unclear activity does not become clearer by adding more letters after it.

The mini-matrix below is an illustrative completed example for the material change. The allocation of roles shown is not a standard for every construction contract. Replace the roles with the designated people and check their authority.

The A for ‘prepare cost proposal’ is answerable for a correct proposal. That differs from permission to order the additional work. Confirmation of the change to the instruction therefore appears on a separate row.

Also agree which outcome or document is needed to continue. Has the proposal been assessed, has the change been confirmed by someone with authority and has the current instruction been updated? Record important qualifications. A read chat message or a thumbs-up is not necessarily equivalent to the required decision.

How do you give external parties access without sharing all information?

Assess three different matters: what someone is responsible for, which decisions they may make and which information they can see in a system. An architect may need relevant design communication without access to internal pricing considerations. An app administrator may have technical permissions without authority over design content.

In Woub, you can use several chats within a project, such as an internal discussion chat and a separate chat with the client or subcontractor. Choose participants for each chat. Invited external participants join free of charge in the contractor’s paid environment, including accessible project tasks and the Wouby AI workflow. Their rights and the subscription limit access. A free participant is therefore not an unrestricted administrator.

At subcontractors the value lies in clear execution and feedback. A construction project supervisor needs to follow what was discussed during visits and which decision is still missing. Let both roles participate in the relevant context without sharing internal margins or staffing considerations.

Organise access practically:

1. Establish which work or discussion the external person is joining.

2. Choose the appropriate project or communication context and check the participants.

3. Ask the person to open a necessary agreement and its associated document.

4. Check separately what must remain internal and who can change access.

5. Review access when someone is replaced, changes role or completes the assignment.

A chat invitation does not automatically grant access to a drawing in another document environment. Equally, a working document link does not prove the recipient can also see the relevant task or change. Test both sides with the actual participant.

Have an administrator add or remove participants according to your process. Removing an account does not automatically retrieve information previously forwarded. Share selectively, rather than giving everyone a full set of records and trying to restore the separation afterwards.

Woub remains complementary to ERP, BIM, DMS, estimating and specialist scheduling. The authoritative source, authority over content and access rights in those systems remain separately managed.

How do you prevent tasks falling between roles?

Give a specific follow-up action a clearly identified owner and agreed feedback. ‘Project preparation will do it’ is insufficient if three colleagues share that role. Ask the recipient to confirm what is needed and who is waiting for the result.

The APM principle on responsibility in collaboration emphasises appropriate information, tools and communication as well as clear roles. A task owner without access or the necessary source cannot properly take over the action.

Wouby AI automatically creates tasks from supported recorded conversations and links the person responsible. Without a known action date, Woub sets the task to today. Check the action and date; this is a date for attention, rather than a deadline agreed on the other person’s behalf. Automatic recording does not resolve missing authority or an unclear instruction. For the product workflow, read automatically turning construction agreements into tasks.

For the alternative component, test this handover: can the construction project coordinator identify who assesses it technically, can the project manager find the required confirmation and does the site manager know which instruction applies? Also ask a tradesperson on site to find the necessary outcome without help from the person who set up the records.

Arrange cover deliberately. Identify which outstanding actions are being taken over, which access is needed and how the original owner is removed from the active workflow. An extra name in a group chat is not a complete handover.

Finally, agree what happens if there is no answer. Who makes contact, who can escalate the matter and who needs to know that site operations are still waiting for a condition to be met? Marking a task complete because an email was sent can hide the actual outstanding issue.

Handing over tasks when arranging cover

When a new colleague is added to a Woub chat, they see the available chat history within that context by default. Colleagues can be added to several existing chats through a bulk action. This saves forwarding individual email exchanges afterwards, but does not replace discussing the most important outstanding actions and authority. When someone leaves, also update participants and task responsibilities.

In practice: a question does not always have to go through the owner

At BTS Bouwbedrijf colleagues involved can answer questions in the project environment even when owner Arkadiusz is in a meeting. The shared context also supports cover during absences. The business keeps scheduling and administration in 2Jours. The case supports the handover described, rather than a universal allocation of authority.

At Karel Kamp Roland Balk describes how he can read summaries of conversations colleague Angelo has had with site teams, and how Wouby AI turns agreements into tasks. This makes the division of roles visible in daily work: the caller does not have to explain all the context to the office again. The task still needs checking, and the authorised person makes the substantive decision.

How does this allocation of roles work for smaller and larger contractors?

At smaller contractors, one person often combines several roles. Larger organisations have more handovers between departments, projects and external parties. In both cases, the specific person and decision procedure must remain identifiable.

Around 1–10 employees: keep the allocation compact. The owner may estimate, prepare and handle client contact. Still identify when they need a specialist or client and who takes over their outstanding agreements during absences. One person holding several roles does not automatically have all external authority.

Around 10–100 employees: pay particular attention to the transition between project manager, construction project coordinator, site manager and subcontractor. When something changes, record who gathers information, who assesses it, who confirms it and who shares the new instruction. Do not leave a gap between ‘discussed in the office’ and ‘understood on site’.

Around 100+ employees: make the allocation specific for each project or work package within the wider organisation. Check authority, cover, role changes and access to several environments. A central standard helps, but does not replace assigning roles to actual project members.

These boundaries provide practical guidance, rather than a standard. A small specialist business can have complex interfaces, while a larger business may use a straightforward project workflow.

Start with one representative change and have those involved work through the steps: request, assess, confirm, instruct and carry out. Also test an absent colleague or new external contact. Adjust the allocation of roles where someone cannot identify who takes the next step.

The broader process is covered in project management in construction. To trial daily coordination, try Woub free for 14 days and use the guide for site managers to prepare a suitable trial with office and site teams.