Bildstak vs spreadsheet-based claim preparation?

Question

Accepted Answer

Spreadsheet claim preparation is manual, slow and hard to audit. Bildstak's Claims Builder traces the delay chain from cause to cost across live BIM, schedule, cost and document data, assembles a cited claim package automatically, and produces a defensible record that would take weeks to build by hand. Spreadsheet-based claim preparation is the industry default — and one of the most time-consuming and risk-laden activities in commercial management. The typical process involves exporting data from P6, the cost system and the document register, manually reconciling them across multiple tabs, and writing a narrative that references dozens of records by hand. A modest Extension of Time claim can take weeks.

The risks are structural:

- Transcription errors in the reconciliation step undermine the claim's credibility under scrutiny.
- Version control — which export was the basis of the claim? — becomes a dispute in itself.
- Traceability is limited; a reviewer cannot easily follow a number back to its source record.
- Updates require redoing the reconciliation whenever new data arrives.

Bildstak's Claims Builder works from live federated data:

- It reads the accepted P6 programme and traces the critical path impact of a delay event.
- It pulls the relevant RFIs and notices from Procore or Aconex and links them to the delay.
- It reads the cost ledger (SAP/Maconomy) for the quantum.
- It surfaces the contract clause from the document register.
- It assembles a cited claim package where every figure is traceable to its source record.

The output is a defensible, auditable claim — built in hours rather than weeks, from live data rather than a point-in-time export.

Bildstak vs la préparation de réclamations sur tableur ?

Related questions