Defects are part of every major plant engineering project. The decisive factor is not whether they occur - but how professionally defect management is organized in project management.
This is precisely where it is decided whether projects remain controllable or gradually lose time, money and trust.
A practical comparison impressively shows how big the difference between classic and digital defect management really is.
Defect managementin project management - why the process is crucial
Many parties come together in plant construction: clients, suppliers, construction site teams, planners and project managers.
When defects occur, information must flowquickly, clearly and comprehensibly.
In reality, this often fails due to
media breaks (paper, Excel, email)
multiple data entry
a lack of real-time transparency
unclear responsibilities
The result: delays, misunderstandings and unnecessary costs.
Practical example: Defect management without digital consistency
This is what the classic defect management process without digital project management often looks like:
Repeated transmission of the same information
High manual effort
Time delays due to email communication
No central, up-to-date database
High need for coordination due to lack of transparency
In short: the process thrives on improvisation - not control.
Practical example: digital defect management with project twins
Digital project management and a digital project twin fundamentally change the process.
It is not the plant that is digitally mapped - but the project status in real time.
This is what defect management with COMAN looks like:
What changes as a result
No media disruptions
No duplicate data entry
Clear responsibilities
Real-time transparency for all parties involved
Complete, audit-proof documentation