The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
Back to feedPost
A Rs. 85 Cr revenue project-driven built environment business continued growing, but EBITDA declined from 11% to 6% over 3 years.
Leadership initially believed the issue was execution inefficiency.
The deeper review showed something else:
-aggressive pricing approvals without structured thresholds
-inconsistent variation order recovery
-commercial exceptions approved outside defined controls
-estimation assumptions changing during execution
-high dependence on promoter-led deal decisions
The result was predictable:
Revenue scaled faster than commercial discipline.
After introducing structured bid governance, pricing controls, authority thresholds, and commercial review mechanisms, margin visibility improved significantly before execution itself began.
In many project businesses, margin erosion starts much earlier than site execution.
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
Related posts
AI allows us to write code faster. But that doesn’t necessarily mean we are delivering software faster.
This is one of the most interesting contradictions emerging in software development.
According to GitLab’s 2026 AI Accountability Report, conducted by The Harris Poll among 1,528 developers and technology decision-makers across six countries:
• 78% say developers are writing and committing code faster since adopting AI tools.
• 79% believe individual developer productivity has improved.
• However, 85% agree that the bottleneck has shifted from writing code to reviewing and validating it.
• Additionally, 82% believe AI-generated code could create a new form of technical debt that their organizations are not yet prepared to manage.
GitLab calls this the “AI Paradox”: individual productivity increases, but the overall software delivery process does not accelerate at the same pace.
Research from DORA, Google Cloud’s software delivery performance research program, points in a similar direction.
Its findings show that a 25% increase in AI adoption was associated with a 1.5% decrease in delivery throughput and a 7.2% decrease in delivery stability.
This does not mean that AI always harms software development. These results show an association, not a universal rule or a causal relationship that applies to every team.
The problem is not using AI.
The problem begins when an organization accelerates code generation while leaving the rest of its development process unchanged:
• Slow manual reviews.
• Limited automated testing.
• Ambiguous requirements.
• Oversized pull requests.
• Lack of architectural criteria.
• Poor traceability.
• Unclear ownership of AI-generated code.
If we double the speed of one stage without improving the next ones, we simply move the bottleneck somewhere else.
Manav Khurana, Chief Product and Marketing Officer at GitLab, summarized it clearly:
“Speed without control is a liability, not an advantage.”
As a full-stack developer, I believe AI can genuinely accelerate tasks such as creating components, writing documentation, exploring solutions, refactoring code, or generating an initial set of tests.
But producing more code should never be the main measure of success.
The result should be measured in software that:
• Solves a real need correctly.
• Remains maintainable over time.
• Includes testing and security controls.
• Can be understood by other developers.
• Reaches production without multiplying incidents.
AI does not eliminate the need for architecture, testing, and technical judgment. On the contrary, the faster we can generate code, the more important these elements become.
The next competitive advantage will not be generating more code with AI. It will be verifying it, governing it, and turning it into reliable software.
Has AI actually reduced delivery time for your team, or has it simply increased the amount of code waiting to be reviewed?
And remember: good software starts with good decisions. See you in the next one.
The distinction between writing code faster and delivering software faster is exactly where many teams get stuck. Which non-coding bottleneck do you think AI-assisted teams underestimate most?
What a site audit reveals that a business owner rarely expects?
Most business owners who request a site review come in expecting feedback on design. What the audit actually reveals is usually something else entirely.
The design is rarely the primary problem. What comes up more often is that the site is structured around how the business thinks about itself rather than how a buyer thinks about their problem.
Services are named using internal language the business uses internally but that a prospective client would never search for. The most important information is buried below content that felt important at the time the site was built but no longer reflects how the business works.
A few things that come up consistently. Contact forms with too many required fields that reduce the number of people who complete them. About pages that read like a resume rather than a reason to trust someone. Home pages that lead with the business name and a tagline instead of a clear statement of what the business does and who it serves.
None of these are obvious from the inside. When you have looked at your own site enough times, you stop seeing it the way a first-time visitor does. That distance is what an independent review restores.
The most common response I hear after walking someone through findings is that they knew something felt off, but couldn't name it. The audit names it and gives them a clear order of what to address first.
That clarity is usually worth more than the fix itself.
The line about clients knowing something felt off but not being able to name it really nails why audits are worth paying for. Do you have a go-to way of explaining that value before someone's actually seen the audit?
Sales Performance Analysis
An executive-level sales analytics dashboard built to give leadership a real-time read on revenue performance across regions, products, and sales channels — replacing static monthly sales decks with a live, filterable report.
What it Does
Surfaces headline KPIs (Total Sales, YoY Growth, Average Order Value, Invoice Volume) so performance is legible in seconds, not buried in a spreadsheet
Breaks sales down by region, product category, and channel, so leadership can see exactly where growth is coming from — and where it's stalling
Tracks sales trend over time with year-over-year comparison, distinguishing genuine growth from seasonal noise.
Ranks top-performing sales reps or products, turning a static report into an actionable list rather than a wall of numbers.
Fully interactive: slicers for year, region, and category recalculate every visual instantly, so one report replaces what used to be several static exports.
Why this Matters for your Business
Sales leaders shouldn't have to wait for a monthly deck to know how the quarter is trending. This dashboard stays live — filter to any region, product line, or time period and every number recalculates instantly, so conversations shift from "let me pull that" to actually deciding what to do about the numbers in front of you.
Trending
Claude
Claude has entered the design space. How are you using Claude Design?
Contra University
Learn from expert creatives how to earn more using next-gen AI tools.
creativeaiflow
Creative AI workflows are evolving. What tools do you use, and what are their strengths and weaknesses?
freelancerlife
Freelancer life is wins, pivots, and everything in between. What’s yours right now?