Daaxit, a provider of fractional CFO services for contractors, has published a new educational resource designed to help construction leadership teams transform key performance indicators (KPIs) into a monthly management scorecard. The guide, released on August 3, 2026, focuses on connecting company goals with measurable financial and operational results, addressing a common challenge where contractors collect data but lack a consistent review process.
The resource is aimed at construction businesses that gather financial and project data but struggle with assigning responsibility and responding to changes. It outlines categories of information commonly used to monitor profitability, cash flow, active jobs, backlog, labor performance, and monthly financial position. By organizing these indicators, the scorecard aims to provide a clearer view of a company's health.
The guide begins with financial indicators that show the overall condition of the business, including revenue, gross profit, gross-margin percentage, net profit, EBITDA, cash flow, accounts receivable, debt, and working capital. It then addresses job-level indicators such as estimated margin, current margin, labor productivity, work in progress, underbilling, overbilling, change orders, and cost to complete. Reviewing these measures while projects are still active can give leadership teams a more current perspective than waiting until jobs are closed.
Aaron Mills, Founder and CEO of Daaxit, emphasized the importance of clarity over additional reporting. “I don’t believe in creating extra layers of reporting. That’s why a scorecard should make responsibility clearer, reducing the need for more reporting,” he said. “The purpose is to show what changed, who owns the result, and what action needs to follow during the next review cycle.”
Daaxit treats cash flow as distinct from reported profit. The resource identifies cash forecasts, receivables aging, retainage, payroll requirements, vendor obligations, debt payments, and billing position as measures that can help explain why a profitable contractor may still experience liquidity pressure. Backlog is also evaluated separately from total contracted work, with attention to expected margin, labor availability, project timing, customer payment terms, material exposure, and the company’s capacity to perform the work.
This structure is intended to help contractor leadership teams distinguish between activity and financial strength. A growing backlog may support future revenue, but it can also increase working-capital demands and operational risk when staffing, billing, or job-cost assumptions are not reviewed. The full framework is available at Daaxit.
Mills recommends assigning an owner to each major KPI and reviewing results on a regular monthly schedule. Financial indicators may be owned by the CFO or finance lead, while labor productivity, change-order status, billing, collections, and project performance may involve operations, project management, accounting, or department leaders. Daaxit also recommends tracking targets, current results, prior-period results, and required follow-up actions. This format can help leadership teams identify trends and document responsibility without expanding the scorecard beyond the measures used to make decisions.
Mills describes the process as a management routine rather than a one-time dashboard project. The value of the scorecard depends on consistent data, regular review, clear explanations of variances, and follow-through on assigned actions.
The KPI categories can be adapted for general contractors, builders, and specialty trades. Service contractors may place greater emphasis on technician productivity, dispatch performance, service agreements, and fleet use. Project-based contractors may focus more heavily on work in progress, cost to complete, underbilling, retainage, and backlog margin. The resource also addresses the need to separate performance by division, location, project type, estimator, project manager, or crew when company structure requires more detailed analysis. This can help leadership teams determine where reported results are being produced and where corrective review may be needed.
