The Reality of Running Truss Operations Across Many Tools

The technology used in truss manufacturing has evolved over many years.

Over time, teams added tools to solve real problems. Design software to handle engineering. ERP systems to manage accounting. Spreadsheets to track bids and job status. Email to coordinate people. Shared drives to store files. Plant systems to manage production.

Each of these tools was adopted for a good reason.
The challenge is that none of them were designed to manage the entire process.

A typical truss job lives in many places

From the moment a bid comes in, information begins to spread.

Pricing lives in one place.
Revisions in another.
Approvals in email.
Job status in a spreadsheet.
Files in shared drives.

By the time a job reaches production, no single system shows how it all fits together.

The work is happening, but the full picture is hard to see.

Why visibility breaks down

Most management tools are very good at storing data.

They are not designed to show how work moves.

A spreadsheet can tell you numbers.
An ERP can tell you totals.
An email can notify someone.

None of them can answer:

• Who owns the next step

• What changed

• Whether a job is ready to move forward

So people fill the gaps manually.

The hidden cost of rechecking

When teams cannot see the full process, they protect themselves by verifying everything.

They open multiple files.
They compare versions.
They ask for confirmation.
They double check.

This does not happen because people are careless.
It happens because the system does not provide reliable visibility.

Every recheck slows the job down.
Every delay adds friction.

Why this problem has lasted so long

One reason this is so common is that truss management software changes slowly.

Many plants are still using core systems that were adopted decades ago. Some of these tools have been in place since the 1990s. They were built for a time when teams were smaller, jobs were simpler, and most work happened in one facility.

Those systems still do important work, but they were never designed for the modern reality of multi facility operations, CMF projects, and constant change.

Because switching systems is risky, most teams do not replace them. They add spreadsheets, email, and shared drives to fill the gaps.

That is how tool sprawl becomes normal.

Why adding more tools does not fix it

When visibility problems appear, teams often add another tracker or another report.

Each new tool helps locally.
But it also creates another place where the truth can drift.

More data does not always mean more clarity.

Without something that connects everything, complexity grows faster than visibility.

What modern truss teams are moving toward

High performing truss teams are not trying to replace their existing tools.

They keep:

• Design in design software

• Financials in ERP

• Production in plant systems

What they add is a way to see how work moves between those systems.

They use a central process layer that tracks:

• Job stage

• Responsibility

• Changes

• Status

• History

That gives everyone a shared understanding of where work stands.

Conclusion

When no single system shows how work moves, teams compensate by rechecking, confirming, and slowing jobs down just to stay safe. Over time, that friction becomes normal.

Cadynce gives truss teams that missing visibility gap.

Book a demo to see how Cadynce helps you reduce rechecking, gain clarity, and keep work moving.