Ops Manager at EMCOR Brands

300 drills for 200 guys. Why?

ToolWatch ties every tool to a person, not just a job site, so crews stop hunting and you stop buying tools you already have.

Not ready for a call? Watch: How Construction Teams Lose Time →

Already running at 13 EMCOR companies.

"Money saved. You are going to save tons of money versus doing it manually... ToolWatch is a big time and money saver." – Morley Moss

See how it works in 2 Minutes

See why EMCOR contractors are replacing paper logs and spreadsheets with ToolWatch.

Resources for Ops Managers Building More Efficient Operations.

Blog

8 Reasons to Automate Your Asset Tracking

Read the article →

Blog

The Importance of Service Requests in Streamlining Operations

Read the article →

One-pager

ToolWatch’s Wireless Tracking: Find Every Tool, Everyd Time

Download the one-pager →

WHAT TOOLWATCH CUSTOMERS ARE SEEING

MORLEY-MOSS · AN EMCOR COMPANY

Less than 1% of 3,100 tools missing on one jobsite

"This is by far the best system I've ever used."

Michael S.

Tool & Asset Manager, Morley-Moss

SAULSBURY

90% less tool room wait time

Without adding headcount to the tool room.

Read the case study →

PLAN GROUP

Zero net cost tool crib

A 3% job-site charge-back covers 100% of tool losses across 10,000+ SKUs and 100+ active jobsites.

Read the case study →

Is ToolWatch Right for Your EMCOR Company?

This is for you if

• You're responsible for tool accountability across multiple crews and jobsites, not just one

• Your crews lose real time every week tracking down tools

• You're opening or standardizing a new branch and don't want it starting from zero

• You've never put a number on what those lost minutes cost you

This is NOT for you if

• You run a single small crib with no jobsite transfers to track

• Your tool tracking already runs on a high quality, real-time, scan-based check-in/out system

Already used by 13 EMCOR companies.

Questions Ops Managers ask about ToolWatch

Will this slow my foremen down instead of saving them time?

It replaces a manual paper or spreadsheet check-in with a scan. Morley-Moss’s team was spending 30 to 45 minutes per jobsite on manual tracking before moving to a system-based process, and Saulsbury’s crews saw the same kind of time come back.

Does it work for field crews without reliable connectivity on the jobsite?

That’s a fair question to bring to the call. Morley-Moss’s own team dealt with a connectivity-constrained site (110 pages of paper to track roughly 2,000 tools there), so it’s worth walking through how your specific jobsites compare. Scans are captured on the device and sync once there's a connection, so a jobsite with spotty signal doesn't stop check-in and check-out from happening.

What does it actually take to roll this out across our branches?

It depends on branch count and current process, and we’d rather give you a real number on the call than a generic promise here.

How is this different from just tightening up our current spreadsheet or paper process?

The core shift is assigning tools to a responsible person, not just a job site. That single change is what took Morley-Moss’s missing-tool count down significantly on the jobsite they tracked, and it’s the same shift behind the “300 drills for 200 guys” problem going away.

What if my team stops trusting the numbers the way they don’t trust our current count?

That’s the actual problem responsible-party tracking is built to fix. Once a tool is tied to a name, not a general job-site bucket, the count stops being a guess.

How long before we see results like Morley-Moss did?

Results build in as responsible-party tracking rolls out branch by branch. We’ll give you a realistic timeline based on your branch count on the call, not a canned rollout number.

300 drills for 200 guys. Why?

Not ready for a call? Watch: How Construction Teams Lose Time →