Do you need a general contractor? That question, posted across LinkedIn, TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook…pulled in one of the biggest comment threads Construction Hot Takes has ever seen, and on this episode Adam Cooper, Jeff Robertson, and Greg Gorman read the responses live and react in real time.
The GC debate runs the full spectrum: one commenter argues a general contractor is just a paid middleman standing between owners and the trades who do the actual work; another says GCs with real “skin in the game” are the only ones worth hiring. Jeff pushes back hard on the middleman framing, Greg walks through a client who’s about to become their own developer, and Adam draws on his own history as a trade contractor working direct for a facilities client to map out exactly when a GC layer is, and isn’t, worth the cost.
From there the hosts work through a stack of other hot takes: why running one big project usually beats juggling ten small ones, Jeff’s blunt rebuttal to the idea that you can’t force 100% safety compliance on a job site, and a surprisingly contrarian take on whether LEED certification is still worth chasing in 2026. Producer Josh closes it out with a two-minute recap of the episode’s sharpest takeaways.
Watch the Episode
In This Episode
Whether a general contractor is a value-adding coordinator or an unnecessary middleman, tested against real LinkedIn and TikTok comments
Why having “skin in the game” changes how hard a GC or construction manager works
Jeff Robertson’s blunt take on why “you can’t force 100% compliance” misses the point of job-site safety
Why running one large project usually beats juggling ten smaller ones, except when the one big job goes wrong
A contrarian take on whether LEED certification is still worth chasing in 2026
Episode Chapters
0:04 — Cold open: Construction Hot Takes goes viral on TikTok
0:44 — “If you’re working 80 hours and not making money, you’re an idiot”
3:24 — Is a general contractor just a paid middleman?
7:58 — Does “skin in the game” make a GC try harder?
“If you’re the owner of the business, you should be paying yourself first in almost every case — what’s the point of owning the business and doing all the work if you’re not getting any reward out of it?”
— Adam Cooper, 1:29
“Safety is a mindset and it’s an approach. It’s not something you bolt on. It’s not about compliance.”
— Jeff Robertson, 16:38
“Everything on a construction site that is now a rule, a law, a protocol, or a best practice is because someone got hurt not doing it right.”
— Greg Gorman, 18:04
Frequently Asked Questions
Do you need a general contractor for a construction project?
In most cases, yes. A general contractor consolidates subcontractors, manages the schedule, and takes on contractual responsibility for coordinating a job site. The Construction Hot Takes hosts note a GC becomes less necessary only in narrow cases, like a facility hiring two or three trades directly under its own project manager.
What does a general contractor actually do that a subcontractor can’t?
A general contractor manages the plan, schedule, and coordination across every trade on a job, taking on legal responsibility other subs don’t carry. Jeff Robertson argues the GC’s real job is helping trade partners make money by running a well-coordinated project, not just marking up invoices.
Does having “skin in the game” make a GC or CM work harder?
Yes — hosts agree financial exposure makes a GC or construction manager more attentive to a project’s outcome. Greg Gorman points out the extra effort isn’t necessarily about working harder; it’s the added pride and ownership that comes from having money riding on the result.
Can you force construction workers to follow safety rules 100% of the time?
Not through force alone, but that doesn’t make 100% the wrong standard. Jeff Robertson argues nearly every safety rule on a job site exists because someone got hurt not following it, so treating safety as a mindset rather than a compliance checkbox is what actually keeps a crew safe.
Is it better to run one large construction project or several smaller ones?
Most project managers find one large job easier to run than several smaller ones, since fewer clients and fewer moving parts mean less that can go wrong. The tradeoff: a single large project going badly can sink a company, so smaller jobs spread that risk across more clients.
Is LEED certification still worth pursuing in construction?
Opinions are mixed. Jeff Robertson argues most of LEED’s original requirements are now standard building code, so its case today rests more on marketing than energy-cost ROI. Other hosts still see real value in sustainability broadly, even if LEED itself feels like an outdated framework.
About the Hosts
Adam Cooper: President & CEO of Ascent Consulting. A former electrical contractor, Adam built and scaled his own construction business before founding Ascent, and brings that operator’s perspective to questions about GC value, culture, and running real construction companies. Jeff Robertson: Vice President at Ascent Consulting. With 30+ years across diverse construction sectors, Jeff brings a contrarian, math-and-experience-grounded take on GC economics, job-site safety, and operational execution. Gregory Gorman: Principal Senior Consultant at Ascent Consulting. A former construction company CFO, Greg brings a measured, risk-and-strategy lens to questions about job selection, safety culture, and how construction businesses actually make money.
Wondering Whether You Actually Need a General Contractor?
Whether you’re a GC rethinking your value to clients, a sub weighing a direct-hire opportunity, or an owner deciding how to structure your next project, Ascent Consulting can help you think it through. With a free 30-minute performance consultation, we’ll help you figure out what’s right for your business. Book a Free Consultation
Join our mailing list & gain more construction business insights from our experts.
Episode Transcript
[0:04] Adam: Welcome to today’s episode of Construction Hot Takes. So apparently we’re now on TikTok — I just found that out. Marketing took it upon themselves, and we’ve gone somewhat viral: over 22,000 views on just one of the videos you and I have been bantering about — do we even need general contractors anymore? So today our producers said, let’s pull all the comments off TikTok, LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter, and respond to some of them from our listeners and viewers.
[0:36] Jeff: I love doing this.
[0:38] Adam: This should be fun. All right, Eric, what do you got for us? What’s the first comment?
[0:44] Eric: Michael Jazdiff on LinkedIn says, “Read The E-Myth. If you’re working 80 hours a week and not making money, you’re an idiot and have an addiction. Wake up.”
[0:57] Adam: Well, Michael — fantastic comment. I love The E-Myth. It was one of the first books I read when I was designing and building this business. So definitely, if you’re working more than 40 hours a week and not making money, we should talk.
[1:15] Jeff: My question on that is, what was the source of that?
[1:18] Eric: The source was Adam’s post talking about people who come up to him saying they’re overworking themselves and still not making a profit as the owner or founder of a business.
[1:29] Adam: Yeah. So if you’re the owner of the business, you should be paying yourself first in almost every case, because what’s the point of owning the business and doing all the work if you’re not getting any reward out of it? You need to make sure you’re paying yourself. But as to his comment about The E-Myth — great book.
[1:47] Jeff: I have a stack of them on my desk and I give them out. I’ve read it multiple times.
[1:52] Greg: I’ll just add something to that, though. I don’t know if this is what Michael means, but two years into your business, if you’re working 80 hours a week and you’re not making money, that’s a problem. But maybe in the first three or four months—
[2:09] Adam: I underpaid myself in the beginning because I needed cash to get the business going.
[2:12] Greg: Because you have to start the car moving. But if the car is on the highway and you’re rolling down the road and you’re not making money—
[2:17] Adam: That’s a big red flag.
[2:19] Greg: I think as a business owner, there’s an expectation that maybe for a while, if you can afford it, you don’t make as much money as you will in the future, as long as you know you’re working toward something.
[2:34] Adam: Sure. Or in another case, if you’re getting ready to make a big investment, you might hold back on taking extra compensation so you can reinvest in the business. But by and large, if your business is operating in a healthy fashion, you should be making good money as the owner.
[2:48] Greg: Good money. Agreed.
[2:50] Jeff: Otherwise you just bought a job.
[2:52] Adam: Yeah, not a very high-paying one.
[2:54] Jeff: Not a very good one.
[2:57] Greg: Well, one last thing — there’s something called opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of working somewhere, even if you own the business and aren’t making money, isn’t just what you’re losing at your business — you’re losing money by not going and getting another job where you could be paid. It’s really important to think about opportunity cost when you talk about starting a business.
[3:19] Adam: Yeah. Well, business ownership isn’t for everybody.
[3:22] Greg: Exactly.
[3:24] Eric: Leland McCullough on LinkedIn says, “A GC is a buffer or gatekeeper for customers and property managers who just don’t have the time, network, knowledge, or resources to put together a team and manage it at the same time. Not all GCs are created equal, and some lack basic respect for the subs they call on. Just my take as a sub.”
[3:49] Adam: That must have been on the ‘do we really need general contractors’ post.
[3:53] Greg: I guess — it’s an interesting point, because what he’s describing is what a general contractor is. That’s the point, right? It’s a consolidator of subcontractors, running interference for the owner and the people doing the work. Sometimes GCs actually self-perform things too, so it’s not the exact same thing, but it’s an interesting take. I’ve never really thought about them as being the middleman.
[4:20] Jeff: I 100% do. I’ve got a pretty strong opinion about this — I lived this life for a long time, and there’s a lot of truth in that statement. There’s plenty of people out there sitting in that middleman or integrator position who do a lousy job of it and don’t care about their subcontractors and trade partners, because we’ve done episodes about projects being delayed because of the GC or because of the sub — GCs can just have a shitty plan. But I believe very strongly that the general contractor’s role is: you’ve got the client here, your job is to manage the project and put a plan together. You’ve hired trade partners to do pieces of the work, and you owe it to them — quite literally, legally, because of the subcontract — to help them make money by running a good job and coordinating well. I think that’s a primary function of the general contractor.
[5:36] Greg: I just think the way I was hearing the comment was — in lieu of hiring a general contractor, an owner could just go do all that work themselves. Manage the subs, do what the GC does, cut out the middleman.
[5:58] Jeff: That was the premise of the conversation we had in a prior episode — how viable could that be, in a fantasy world? Realistically, a lot of developers who want to do that just start a captive general contracting company they own that only does their work, because it’s shifting risk and insurance.
[6:24] Adam: But I’ve worked as a trade contractor — I used to get work directly for, say, a manufacturing facility. They didn’t need a general contractor, they just needed two or three trades, and they’d hire us direct, and a facilities management group would act as the intermediary to coordinate the project.
[6:43] Jeff: A facilities management group is just another way of saying general contractor, in a fancier way — except they’re not a separate entity, they’re just employees of the company.
[6:51] Adam: Right, but they’re professional project managers.
[6:53] Jeff: You hope. Well, they’re supposed to be.
[6:59] Greg: Maybe it’s another way of saying captive — they work for me, that’s what they are, right?
[7:05] Adam: I still think there’s a world where we don’t need general contractors, but it’s not for everybody.
[7:10] Greg: Maybe not a world — there’s use cases.
[7:13] Jeff: I think we’re going to get some comments on that statement.
[7:17] Greg: I think you’re wrong. I think a lot of people out there might—
[7:22] Jeff: However, I think you could define terms in a way that gets you a narrow band — like a facility management company that’s not a pure general contractor in the sense we’re talking about, because you don’t need that middleman when they already work for the manufacturer you’re doing work for. But that’s not the same thing as a general contractor by the traditional definition.
[7:58] Eric: I have found GCs with skin in the game are usually the best. Other than that, they’re construction managers. The key is communication, scheduling, and understanding timelines. This is from Phil Zenz on LinkedIn.
[8:14] Jeff: The second part of that statement is 100% accurate — I couldn’t agree more. The ‘skin in the game’ part is interesting; that’s a relatively new concept, in the last 20 years or so, where general contractors will put money into the project. When I was competing for work and didn’t win, I’d say, ‘well, he bought the project’ — he wrote a check instead of just cutting his bid. If you’re thinking about it from a business standpoint, contractors are cutting checks these days and becoming financially involved in the project, so of course they’re going to be more engaged — there’s potentially some return for them on the back end.
[9:12] Adam: That’s interesting — that’s not how I interpreted that comment.
[9:15] Greg: I interpreted it more the way you’re about to say.
[9:18] Adam: I was thinking about a general contractor that self-performs — like, I’ve got to get the concrete down, I’m doing the civil, I’m doing the rough carpentry, and I’ve got to get that done so I don’t hold up the other trades. Otherwise I’m the bottleneck and the whole project goes south, and I’ve got skin in the game because I’m self-performing part of the scope.
[9:44] Greg: So then we have three different takes. I’ve got a client right now in New York City — I was just there this week we’re filming this — they’re a construction manager who’s about to become their own developer and put money into a project they’ll then CM.
[10:00] Adam: By the way — if the topics we’re talking about are of interest to you and you’d like to talk with me directly, my email address is in the show notes.
[10:07] Eric: A comment said, “GCs would jerk you around under the desk for a chance to bid.”
[10:13] Adam: Electrical contractors — what are we picking on electricals for? That sounds more like a plumber to me.
[10:20] Jeff: I was listening way too literally, sorry.
[10:29] Adam: Electrical contractors would literally give you a favor to get an opportunity to bid the job.
[10:33] Greg: Are we going to have to put an ‘E’ for explicit on this episode?
[10:36] Adam: We curse on almost every episode, Greg.
[10:38] Greg: Do we?
[10:39] Adam: Usually Jeff does.
[10:41] Greg: Jeff does. I don’t remember cursing.
[10:45] Adam: Jeff finds a way to slip an F-bomb in everywhere. I tend to as well, I’ve found. So — depends on the electrical contractor, depends on the general, depends on the project.
[10:59] Jeff: Did he buy you a drink first?
[11:02] Adam: Was there a reach-around afterward?
[11:05] Greg: Oh, man — E for explicit.
[11:11] Eric: A TikTok about should developers cut out the GC: ‘20-year general contractor here — cutting out the GC is a great idea (sarcastic) — call me after.’
[11:22] Adam: I did read this comment, and if I recall, he’s a residential builder saying you don’t want to build direct for a homeowner if you’re a sub — you always want a general, because homeowners will jerk you around, won’t pay their bills, will withhold information, and you’ll wind up losing money on the job. Which I think is very true — there are very few homeowners who know how to build their own homes.
[11:47] Greg: But I’d say that could go for everyone — not to disparage clients, but that could be said for anyone.
[11:59] Jeff: I completely agree — working for anyone who has the direct purse strings, with no middleman to speak up for you as a sub, you could get in serious trouble.
[12:10] Greg: So I’m not saying that’s the only reason to have a GC, but it’s helpful in certain scenarios.
[12:14] Jeff: Well, North Carolina’s a really good example — they have public projects there, and I don’t know what it is about the state law, but it happens a lot: your MEP trades are primarily on par contractually with the general contractor. They have a direct contract with the client — say it’s Google building a data center, which is probably happening in North Carolina — and in that case those MEP trades have a seat at the table, so they behave a little differently than if they were one tier down.
[13:00] Greg: Speaking out of turn, or right away from the main table.
[13:04] Jeff: Right. But I couldn’t agree more on the residential thing — I’m sure there are private citizens who’ve built a bunch of homes and know what they’re doing, but for the most part — I’ve said this before — this is why contractors, as a rule, have a bad reputation with the general populace. We’re kind of like car mechanics: people don’t really know what we do, so they’re pretty sure they’re getting screwed because they can’t understand it.
[13:47] Greg: We’ve talked a few times about what’s a disruptor to the construction industry, and things are slow to be adopted, but I just want to point out there’s no disruption right now to the GC model. There have been GCs for a long, long time, and there’s nothing on the table to replace that model.
[14:06] Jeff: There’s different flavors of the same ice cream — design-build, program managers, things like that.
[14:13] Greg: But it’s the same concept — someone runs the job, and someone works up and works down, and that seems pretty stable. I don’t think GCs are going anywhere.
[14:29] Jeff: No, I’d agree.
[14:31] Eric: “As a PM, I agree 100% — running one job versus ten jobs is a no-brainer in favor of the one big job over the ten small ones.”
[14:45] Jeff: As the guy who mostly ran larger jobs through his career, I completely agree. I struggled running ten jobs even when they equaled the same one big job — just more plates in the air.
[15:02] Adam: It’s just more moving parts, more balls to juggle.
[15:06] Jeff: Nine more personalities of clients, maybe — it’s exponential, the number of combinations you end up with. Even signing up some of the same guys across projects, it’s just harder.
[15:22] Greg: But there’s a devil’s advocate point here that’s important to make — one big job that goes badly can ruin you.
[15:31] Adam: It can end your company.
[15:33] Greg: Or be a really big problem from a risk perspective. Trying to diversify across smaller jobs with different people, personalities, and clients has real value — the one big job is great until it’s the worst job you’ve ever had and it bankrupts you. There’s two sides to every story.
[15:52] Adam: Very good point.
[15:54] Eric: All right, I’m going to lob this one up for Jeff. This is about safety in construction: “You cannot force a grown-ass man, the entire time he’s on the job site, to abide by 100% of the rules. Doesn’t happen.”
[16:15] Adam: You did lob that up for Jeff — it’s a slow pitch coming at you.
[16:20] Jeff: Well, I couldn’t disagree more. You can expect that, and you should. Here’s what I’ll say about that: safety is a mindset and an approach. It’s not something you bolt on — it’s not about compliance. Forty-two-inch handrails have saved people from falling off buildings, no denying that. But people still fall off buildings because they take the boards down for legitimate reasons and forget to put them back up, and somebody backs off the edge. So you almost have to expect a grown man to be safe — if not for his own health, then for his wife or girlfriend’s well-being, maybe his kids, or the guy working next to him. I think there’s a moral obligation there. I get really worked up about this — probably shouldn’t.
[17:39] Greg: There’s another point I want to amplify. I think the ‘100%’ framing sounds arrogant to some people — sure, we’d love 80 or 90 — but everything on a construction site that’s now a rule, a law, a protocol, or a best practice is because someone got hurt not doing it right. Fall protection, hard hats — all of it exists because someone learned a lesson the hard way. So it should be 100%. It should be 110%, honestly. Dialing that down to less than 100 means the one thing you skip could be the thing that ends you.
[18:31] Jeff: Yeah — or someone else.
[18:33] Greg: Or someone else. And then it’s a moral responsibility.
[18:38] Jeff: There’s a concept where you get comfortable with risk. I used to teach a class where the scenario was: when you first learn to drive at 15 or 16, and you get on a major interstate with a fully loaded semi coming in the next lane, you’re locked in, ten-and-two, white-knuckling it, scared. But drive for 15 or 20 years and you’re driving with your knees, messing with the radio, texting. The risk didn’t change — that semi still weighs tons and the speed will still kill you — but you got used to it. Job sites didn’t get any safer or less safe, they’re about the same. It’s just your perception of it.
[20:06] Adam: That’s a really good point — I hadn’t thought about it that way.
[20:10] Jeff: You just get used to things. Which is why you need to be thinking about safety 100% of the time — grown men on a job site who are professional construction people should want to be safe 100% of the time. Take a new kid — say my 21-year-old son walks out onto a pretty complicated job site. He’d be uptight, not understanding what’s supposed to be happening, things flying overhead, whistles blowing — and he’d actually be a little less safe because he’s too hesitant and too tight. Then you’ve got the guy who’s been doing it 30 or 40 years, doing it the way his dad did — he’s dangerous too, because he’s complacent and doesn’t recognize the risks that have always been there. You want somebody in the middle — aware of the danger, with just enough respect for it, but capable. Aware and capable. Sorry, I get into that — my volume was going up.
[21:35] Eric: “Combining everything into one platform just saves so much hassle. Manual spreadsheet updates were always where the headache started for me — the built-in tracking in systems like Procore just makes everything smoother.”
[21:53] Greg: I think that’s a really good point — there’s a level of consolidation that’s well-accepted as what people want to work toward: one system, one place to put your data. But sometimes trying to put everything in one place gets overly complicated, or makes things harder because the system isn’t built for that. So there’s a fine line — there are exceptions when it’s better to keep things separate.
[22:38] Adam: We’ve got another episode coming up where Jeff and I do a deep dive on the difference between disparate systems, integrated systems, middleware, and enterprise-level data.
[22:52] Greg: Josh, you should tune in for that one.
[22:58] Adam: Stay tuned for the next episode of Construction Hot Takes.
[23:06] Eric: From Barak Esevith on LinkedIn: “I think sustainability is also a challenge. As climate change gets bigger, the pressure to adopt more sustainable practices and reduce the environmental blueprint will also grow.”
[23:17] Adam: Barak, it’s so nice to hear from you — I met him years ago in person, he lives here in Atlanta, really nice guy. So, sustainability — I’d kick this one over to you, Jeff, a bit more, since you did more with LEED than I ever did. That’s kind of being handled at the design level now, and at the materials-specification level — designing LEED and energy-efficient buildings, using eco-friendly or recycled materials as part of getting different levels of certification. That’s where I’d start.
[23:55] Jeff: I’ll take a bit of a different stance — this is my personal opinion. I think LEED is worthless, and I think it’s a money grab, honestly.
[24:09] Adam: You heard it here first.
[24:12] Jeff: I’m a LEED-certified professional myself — took the test a long time ago, before you had to get continuing credits. I’m not saying new materials, lighter materials, higher-tech materials aren’t good stuff, but I look at it from the owner’s side and I don’t see much ROI, long-term. I don’t think the ROI is what we make it out to be — I think it’s much more about marketing.
[24:59] Greg: I think we’d all agree overall sustainability isn’t a bad thing.
[25:04] Jeff: No, depending on what it is. A vast number of the things that when LEED became a thing 20-odd years ago, most of that’s written into code now — so I just don’t see the benefit anymore, personally.
[25:24] Greg: Maybe we need some future-thinking sustainability that doesn’t exist yet — let’s get more sustainable, probably with AI.
[25:33] Adam: Probably with AI.
[25:35] Greg: AI might be building it right now — a way to make a more sustainable building. I definitely think sustainability’s a good thing, but—
[25:41] Jeff: Yeah, I don’t disagree with that.
[25:43] Greg: The way it exists right now might not be the only way, I guess is what I’d say.
[25:47] Adam: Or it’s outdated.
[25:49] Jeff: It’s outdated, yeah. There’s other frameworks besides LEED — Green Globes, a couple others, at least three or four. Some are more oriented toward residential. Green Globes was supposed to not be as paperwork-heavy as LEED was — it was crazy the amount of tracking you had to do. So there are other frameworks you can work within. I agree sustainability isn’t a bad thing as a concept — I just personally didn’t think LEED was the way to go.
[26:29] Adam: There you go, Barak.
[26:31] Jeff: All due respect to Barak, of course.
[26:34] Adam: All right, well, this was a lot of fun answering comments from our listeners and viewers. I look forward to getting more of your comments. Check us out on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and apparently TikTok now. We’ll see you on the next one.
