Project managers on demand

An integrator wins a rollout across 40 stores in eight provinces. Good news on Monday, and from Tuesday onwards the other part starts: lining up 40 dates with 40 store managers, closing the access permits for each shopping centre, checking that the equipment arrives before the technician does, moving half the schedule because three sites still have building work unfinished, answering the client who asks for a status update every Friday. And all of that is handled by the same person who is preparing the quote for the next project, usually the manager or the technical lead, in spare moments and between calls.

Here is the underlying problem: coordinating a large project is a full time job, but only for a few weeks a year. Hiring a permanent project manager for three peaks a year does not add up, and plenty of integrators who are excellent technically do not have one and never will. So the cost does not disappear, it moves: it gets paid in the manager's hours that are not spent selling, in dates that shift twice, in a client who calls because nobody called them first. Or it gets paid in the worst place of all, by letting the project go for fear of not being able to handle it.

Our idea is that the integrator could bring in a project manager on demand from the platform itself, for one specific project and for as long as that project lasts. Someone who knows audiovisual installation and would take charge of what eats the hours: the schedule, coordination with the technicians, tracking the equipment, the day to day incidents and orderly communication with the end client. When the rollout ends, that person leaves. No new salary, no permanent structure for a temporary peak.

What makes this different from finding a freelancer on your own is that the context would already be in place. The project, its work orders, the assigned technicians, the signed delivery notes and the conversations all live in the same place. There would be no parallel spreadsheet to set up and no bringing them up to speed over five calls: they would come in with access limited to the project they manage, work with the information that is already there, and leave the trail inside, not in their inbox. When they go, they do not take the project away in their head.

All three sides win. The integrator gains capacity without headcount and can bid for rollouts that today are too big for it on coordination, not on technical work. The technicians gain what they ask for most on multi site projects: one single point of contact who answers, instead of three people saying different things. And a space opens up for a profile that does not quite fit in the sector today, people with years of site and management experience who could make a living coordinating other companies' projects.

We will be honest about the hard part, which is not the tool: it is trust. A bad coordinator does more damage than no coordinator at all, so this idea only makes sense if the standard is high and verifiable. What is required of that profile, how far their authority reaches, how the price gets agreed and who answers if something goes wrong are open questions we want to resolve with the sector, not on a whiteboard.

If you coordinate projects, you already know the week we are talking about. Tell us below whether this would be of use to you.