The Fee You Lose Between the Field Text and the Change Order
Quick answer: Almost every GC loses fee to change orders somewhere. A 2026 Dodge Construction Network study, commissioned by Clearstory, found that 98% of GCs have seen fee erosion from change-order negotiations on some of their projects, and nearly half of those saw it pass 10% of fee on at least some jobs. Much of the loss happens in the gap between a change happening in the field and the paperwork catching up, and that gap usually sits with one PM. Drafting the change order from the project record, with a person approving it, shortens the gap.
Key Takeaways
- ●98% of GCs have seen fee erosion from change-order negotiations, and nearly half of them saw it exceed 10% of fee on some projects (Dodge Construction Network and Clearstory, 2026).
- ●67% of GCs name unsolicited changes and T&M work as their top source of change-order risk.
- ●96% say poor change-order visibility hurts their ability to control cost, and 72% still run the process mainly out of spreadsheets.
- ●77% say the process raises stress for their PM teams, and 55% say it lowers job satisfaction.
- ●In one ServiceIQ implementation, an incoming RFI is checked against scope, priced from the matching estimate line and contract clause, drafted as a change order, and routed to a person. Nothing goes out without a signature.
98% of GCs have lost fee to change-order negotiations on some portion of their projects. Of those, nearly half say the loss passed 10% of fee on at least some jobs. The figures come from a 2026 survey by Dodge Construction Network that Clearstory, a change order software vendor, commissioned, so read them with that in mind.
Where the Fee Goes
Two-thirds of GCs (67%) name poorly managed unsolicited changes and T&M work as the biggest source of change-order risk. Work that starts in the field before the paperwork exists is the hardest to price cleanly.
Visibility is the next problem. 96% of GCs say a lack of change-order visibility affects their ability to control project cost, with 78% pointing to unanticipated costs and 60% to late ones. And 91% say they sometimes don't pay the full change-order amount, most often over disputed pricing, incomplete documentation, or scope disagreements. Each of those is a negotiation, and negotiations are where fee erodes.
The process behind those numbers is mostly manual. 72% of GCs run their change-order process primarily out of spreadsheets, 65% compile PM reports from field data by hand, and half run it over email.
Why It Lands on One Person
At most firms the change order gets assembled by one person who has to join four things together: the RFI, the field text, the contract clause, and the estimate. 77% of GCs say the process raises stress for their project management teams, and 55% say it lowers job satisfaction.
That is a cost to the business as well as to the PM. The person carrying it is usually one of your more experienced people, and the load grows with every open job.
What Changes When the Change Order Is Drafted From the Record
In one ServiceIQ implementation (September 2026), the sequence runs like this. An RFI arrives and the model checks whether it describes work outside the original scope. If it does, the model pulls the matching estimate line and contract clause and prices the difference. It drafts the change order and routes it to a person, and nothing goes out without a signature.
Once the change order is executed, the same record updates the contract value, the schedule of values, and the next pay application. There's no separate change-order log to keep in step.
What It Doesn't Do
The system drafts and a person decides. It doesn't choose which change to fight for, which sub to trust, or when to walk away. It also can't see an RFI that never got logged or an email nobody connected to the job, so the records still have to be kept. A pay-when-paid clause or a bad estimate that's already signed stays signed, and the tool only shows the consequence sooner.
Where to Start
Pick change orders as the one problem and measure it for 90 days before you choose any tool. Count the RFIs that carry a cost implication, and time how long it takes from the field event to an executed change order. In the same Dodge research, top-tier trade contractors were more than twice as likely to track change-order KPIs, 55% against 26%.
If you're also looking at scope control on the pricing side, "How a Construction PM System Can Help You With Scope Creep" covers how job status and deal value sit side by side.
Frequently asked questions
Keep reading
Closing the Punch List Gap
A GC losing $18,000 to a missing photo and a foggy memory. Owners price a punch list holdback around how long it takes to get proof, so here's what changes when proof is instant.
Managing Scope Creep
60% of construction projects go over budget because of scope changes. The failure point usually isn't awareness, it's that verbal on-site requests never get logged before they're already built.
AI in the Construction Workplace: Five Problems
Five problems come up on nearly every contractor's desk, change orders, information overload, rework, slow payment, and knowledge loss, and the AI that fits each.
Ready to take on more premium projects without adding to your overhead?
Lock in your flat-rate, unlimited-user fee with ServiceIQ today.
Start your free trial