Why use Woub alongside Dalux, Ed Controls or other quality record software?

What do construction businesses use quality recording software for?

Quality recording software helps keep checks, findings, deviations and evidence with the relevant work. Depending on the project, this may include a location on a drawing, questionnaire, assessment procedure or records structure. Choose the recording method based on what you need to demonstrate and who assesses it.

Agree four things beforehand: where the authoritative record is held, which information belongs with an item, who carries out remedial work and who assesses the result. Also agree who updates the status in the source system. A message about a defect may reach the right person without the formal item being updated.

A photo alone, for example, does not always establish which component was examined, when the photo was taken, which check was required or whether remedial work was accepted. Even a comprehensive app does not automatically make that substantive assessment. The setup must fit the required workflow and project.

This affects small and large businesses alike. A small construction business may carry out work requiring a formal quality assurance procedure. A large business may also have simple internal coordination items. As more teams and subcontractors become involved, responsibilities, access and handover become more important. Headcount does not determine a legal obligation or an automatic software choice.

How do Dalux, Ed Controls, Snagstream and Woub differ?

The three quality solutions have their own recording and follow-up functions. Woub focuses on complementary ad-hoc project communication. It is therefore not a fair comparison to describe the other tools merely as photo storage. Look at where the required coordination already works well and where conversations still take place outside the chosen workflow.

At Dalux the documentation distinguishes between reporting completion and approval. Different roles may also see different status labels. Do not simply compare the word ‘complete’ on two screens. Check who has the next step and which assessment is still needed.

Ed Controls Audits supports a structured questionnaire to which photos or tickets can be linked. For a deviation within such a check, the relevant information must return to that workflow. A complementary Woub task can support contact, but must not hide the fact that the audit item remains outstanding. Available modules depend on the chosen contract.

Snagstream from Pro4all describes items on drawings, photos, forms and PDF reporting, among other functions. Partners can be involved in assigned items. Where this already covers the necessary communication, rebuilding the same quality register in Woub is not useful. Assess complementary value specifically for conversations and agreements that would otherwise become scattered.

The table compares functions based on documentation, rather than a practical test or ranking. Not every module, integration or licence is configured identically in every project.

What does Woub add to day-to-day site operations alongside each tool?

At Dalux the deviation may already be properly recorded with the right location and status. The additional question is then: who opens the home on Wednesday, which team is coming and must the resident be informed? Discuss that practical preparation in the Woub project chat and link actions to the Dalux item. Keep the substantive response and acceptance in the agreed Dalux workflow.

At Ed Controls the documented integration can bring the ticket into Woub as a task. The site manager can then coordinate day-to-day remedial work there. An agreement made during a call to have materials ready can be captured as a task by Wouby AI. This is complementary follow-up; the integration does not send changes from Woub back to Ed Controls.

At Snagstream the item on the drawing, photos and reporting stay in the specialist environment. Use Woub when remedial work also requires coordination with other teams, the office or a resident. Refer to the existing item so nobody needs to retype the whole quality file.

Quick coordination with the subcontractor

In a Woub chat, a colleague involved can briefly confirm with an emoji that they have seen the message. For a remedial action, also record who carries out what. Invited external participants can join the contractor’s paid environment free of charge, including accessible tasks and the Wouby AI workflow. This means remedial work need not be handled solely through the account administrator in the office. See also bringing subcontractors into the workflow.

When are Woub checklists and photos sufficient?

For clearly defined alterations, service and maintenance work without drawing-based records, Woub checklists with photos may be sufficient to organise the work, record what is carried out and follow up snagging items. Examples include a repair in a known home, painting and decorating by room, or checking agreed finishing items. The conditions are that the brief, location, work and assessment are clear and no additional recording format is required. Such a workflow does not automatically require a second app with items on a construction drawing.

This is more than an internal reminder. The checklist can be the practical work list the tradesperson takes along: what was agreed, what was found, what was done and what remains outstanding? Photos provide context. The Woub guide to checklist items describes comments, photos and documents attached to an item, and recorded events such as ticking off and reopening. The content of the record then determines whether a colleague or client understands what was done.

No drawing needed to identify the work area

For many small maintenance jobs, the address and a clear room or asset description are enough to find the location. ‘Basin tap, first-floor bathroom’ is more useful than ‘repair tap’. An overview photo helps the colleague identify the component; a detail photo shows the finding. This organises work around the existing asset without first placing an item on a digital floor plan.

If ‘left-hand window’ becomes unclear because there are several homes, elevations or floors, add a consistent home, room or asset identifier. If a drawing is needed to establish dimensions, a connection or how work should be carried out, a photo does not replace that missing information. Working without drawing-based records differs from omitting necessary technical information.

What do you record during the survey, work and handover?

Use a recognisable structure for each maintenance visit or clearly defined work item. The structure below is a practical checklist proposal, rather than a mandatory set of product fields or technical inspection protocol.

1. Brief and location: record the address, room or asset, reported problem and what falls within the brief. Also record with whom access and the work are coordinated.

2. Situation found: take a recognisable overview photo and, where necessary, a detail photo. Explain what the tradesperson sees and which deviation from the brief has been discovered.

3. Work carried out: describe what was actually done. Add relevant photos of the result and, where appropriate, intermediate stages. Another colleague should be able to take over without calling the first tradesperson.

4. Deviation or additional work: keep the original work and additional request separate. Record the necessary decision before changing the work, price or scope. A photo alone does not constitute approval for additional works.

5. Check and outstanding items: record the outcome of the agreed check, who examined the result and what still needs doing. Do not tick off completed work as a substitute for an assessment that has yet to take place.

For work that will later be hidden, establish beforehand which intermediate stage must be recorded and assessed. This avoids discovering at handover that only a photo of the closed wall is available. The technical check required depends on the work; a photo cannot replace every measurement or inspection.

Examples of alterations and maintenance without a drawing-based work list

These are illustrative working situations, rather than product tests or instructions for the technical repair method. The benefit of this structure is that the same record helps the tradesperson, office and client understand the situation. A separate photo folder without a brief and explanation does not provide that overview.

Customer example: ONNS records a maintenance visit with before-and-after photos

In the customer story about construction business ONNS includes a specific service example: after a report of a broken tap, the business creates a project in Woub. The employee records the finding with a photo, carries out the repair and adds another photo. According to the case, the client receives a description of the completed work the same day, linked to the invoice.

This shows how records can be built around a report and an identifiable asset: complaint, visit, work and result. ONNS also describes daily project photos that help a replacement colleague during sickness absence. Administration stays in KRAAN. The case also mentions the business using drawings for other project work; the example therefore does not prove that ONNS always works without drawings.

Customer example: Zeelenberg keeps progress and handover with the work

Bouwbedrijf Zeelenberg, active in restoration, refurbishment, alterations and maintenance, describes paper job sheets and checklists giving way to information on phones. Employees share progress photos and Marc uses the project information for the written handover.

The relevant lesson for a maintenance business is that recording information during the work also supports completion. You do not wait until afterwards to collect separate photos and comments from different phones. This customer story describes that workflow; it does not demonstrate that a photo automatically counts as approval or that every required file is complete.

Customer example: an alterations template at Bouw Totaal Emmeloord

Bouw Totaal Emmeloord uses separate project templates for new-build construction and alterations, with checklists for the different phases. New lessons are added to those templates. On the next comparable job, the team can therefore start with the improved workflow.

The same case also describes CHEPP for quality records and KYP for the associated scheduling. This illustrates adapting the setup as the work’s requirements grow: simple practical follow-up in Woub, with a complementary specialist route where needed. The case does not state that all alterations projects are carried out without drawings or quality records.

When should you still choose drawing-based or specialist records?

Choose an additional route if items cannot be found unambiguously without a drawing or consistent asset structure, if a client requires a particular inspection workflow or if assessments and records must be submitted through a fixed procedure. Missing technical information, checks before covering up and acceptance by another party may also require additional records.

The choice is therefore not automatically ‘small job = Woub’ or ‘large job = Dalux’. What matters is whether the records adequately support the work and agreed assessment. For a clearly defined maintenance report, a properly completed Woub checklist with photos can provide the practical basis. For a drawing-based deviations register or mandatory quality assurance procedure, the chosen specialist environment remains authoritative. Statutory records are explained separately in the next section. See also handover software without drawings.

From remedial work to a better checklist: Beentjes

In the customer story about Beentjes Hekwerk & Toegangstechniek Barry Beentjes describes the team discussing errors weekly and adding to the checklist at the point where things went wrong. An incorrectly welded baseplate led to an extra check on subsequent projects.

This illustrates the difference between resolving a deviation and learning from its cause. In Woub, project templates can carry improved working arrangements into the next job. The case supports the checklist workflow described; it does not demonstrate an Ed Controls integration or formal Wkb approval. For systematic evaluation, read more about reducing costs arising from errors and rework.

When are an independent Dutch building quality assurer and Wkb records mandatory?

Quality assurance rules do not apply identically to every construction project. According to the current IPLO guidance on the Wkb, the public-law rules have been introduced for the relevant new buildings in Consequence Class 1. According to that guidance, alterations are not yet within the implemented scope; a definitive commencement date has not been set. This was checked on 23 October 2026.

Check the specific technical building activity, conditions, exceptions and any transitional provisions. Not every small building automatically follows the same procedure. The IPLO page on Consequence Class 1 helps with that assessment. Have an expert establish applicability to your project.

For technical building activities within this scope that require notification, an independent Dutch building quality assurer is needed. The assurer uses an approved instrument. Software that records inspections is not automatically such an instrument or an independent assurer. A contractor checking their own work does not automatically fulfil that independent role.

Also distinguish between types of records. The completion notification requires the quality assurer’s statement and the information required for the competent authority’s file. There is also the client handover documentation under Dutch law or handover file for the client. This may also be a professional client; agreements and transitional provisions matter. These records serve different purposes and are not simply the same folder.

‘Alterations currently fall outside this public-law quality assurance scope’ therefore does not mean ‘there are no documentation or contractual obligations’. Have the required documents established beforehand. Choosing an app or ticking off a task list provides no exemption and does not prove complete Wkb records.

How do you coordinate quality deviations and follow-up?

Start with the official item reference and location. Then discuss what is needed to organise remedial work: who makes contact, when is the area accessible, who carries out the work and who assesses the result? Let source records and complementary communication refer to each other without unnecessarily maintaining two complete files.

A fictional example: a deviation at a connection is recorded during an inspection. The subcontractor says by phone that they can come on Wednesday. The site manager must first make the work area available. These are coordination actions around the same formal item, rather than proof that the deviation has been resolved.

Record the agreed attendance and preparation within the project, with the item reference. After remedial work, the subcontractor reports what was done and supplies the agreed supporting evidence. The designated assessor checks the result and processes the assessment in the quality records. This is a process example; it does not prescribe a technical repair method.

Keep three stages separate:

1. Agreement made: someone has committed to carrying out an action.

2. Remedial work reported complete: the person carrying out the remedial work says they have finished.

3. Remedial work assessed: the designated assessor has accepted the result under the project procedure or requested further action.

A photo after remedial work may provide useful support, but let the assessor determine whether it supplies the evidence required. Wouby AI automatically creates tasks from supported recorded conversations and links the person responsible. If no action date is known, the task is set to today; that is not an agreed remedial work date. This is not automatic assessment of construction quality or closure of a formal item.

During implementation, test one deviation with the site manager, subcontractor and assessor involved. Have each find the right source, understand a follow-up action and explain where the formal status is processed. Include an absence or replacement scenario. This is a proposed trial, rather than a product test performed here or a proven saving.

Which integrations are actually available?

Specific Woub documentation exists for Ed Controls. The guide dated 11 November 2025 describes tickets becoming tasks in Woub, with a chat/checklist and transferred status updates. It explicitly specifies one-way traffic: changes in Woub are not sent back to Ed Controls.

De current knowledge base page on Ed Controls describes the same transfer of tickets and statuses to Woub. No return route is documented there. Do not assume two-way synchronisation. Completing a Woub task does not prove that the Ed Controls ticket is closed within the formal workflow.

The described setup requires, among other things, an activated integration, a valid Woub account for the site manager involved and exactly matching project names. The documentation also mentions automatic project creation if a project is missing. Have this behaviour and the project mapping checked beforehand so a different name does not lead to an unintended separate project environment.

Use an agreed test setup to demonstrate what happens with a new ticket, status change, missing project match and a different person responsible. Check which location and image are transferred and who handles errors. This transfer has been checked here against documentation, rather than performed end to end. A documented status update also does not prove that every audit, signature or file attachment is transferred.

This research has not established a specific standard route to Woub for Dalux or Snagstream. That does not prove every custom connection is impossible. Ask about supported data, direction, conditions and error handling. An open API or logo in a software landscape does not prove a working integration.

See how Woub supports project tasks, or try Woub free for 14 days with one agreed coordination process alongside your existing quality records. Make formal assessment and required documentation part of the setup from the outset.