Dexec

Comparison

A design-phase alternative to top-down scheduling.

Critical path tools were built to sequence construction, then borrowed for design. They are excellent at recording a contractual programme, and poor at helping a design team decide what to do next week. Dexec sits alongside them and does the second job properly.

The Beach — execution

The Beach · Committed work

On track
Frame concept issue
Drainage IFC pack
Services coordination
Panel grid review
Fire strategy update
Wk 12Wk 14Wk 16Wk 18
Who builds the plan
Traditional CPM:Set top-down by a planner, often before the design team has a say
Dexec:Built collaboratively by the disciplines doing the work
How the plan is created
Traditional CPM:Dates pushed forward from a start date
Dexec:Work pulled backward from the milestones that matter
Progress reporting
Traditional CPM:Percent-complete estimated by feel, late and hard to challenge
Dexec:Earned progress against commitments the team made
Constraints and blockers
Traditional CPM:Discovered once the delay is already locked in
Dexec:Surfaced early, while there is still time to act
Cadence
Traditional CPM:Monthly re-baselines, static between updates
Dexec:A weekly rhythm the team actually runs to
Reliability measure
Traditional CPM:None — variance is explained after the fact
Dexec:A single, plain reliability score for every project
Built for
Traditional CPM:Construction execution, retrofitted onto design
Dexec:The design phase, from the ground up

Keep your contractual programme where it lives today. Use Dexec for the weekly production control the design team runs to — so the numbers you report upward reflect work that has genuinely been delivered.

How the market compares

Not the same as a task tracker, scheduler, or site tool.

Most software in this space was built for a different job. Dexec is designed for the design phase first.

Generalist SaaS Tools
Monday.com, Jira, Asana
General-purpose task trackers with no concept of pull-planning or constraint readiness built in — tasks move forward on a due date, not on whether the work behind them is actually ready.
Purpose-built for design production, using pull-planning principles from the ground up — not a generic task board repurposed for engineering work.
Legacy Scheduling Software
MS Project, Primavera P6
Excellent for high-level master schedules and milestones, but progress is typically self-reported as a % complete estimate — disconnected from what’s really happening week to week.
Connects milestone-level planning to weekly, team-owned commitments, so progress reflects what was actually delivered, not just what was guessed.
Construction Execution Platforms
Procore, Touchplan
Built for post-award, on-site execution — coordinating trades, RFIs, and field crews once construction has started. Powerful for that job, but not built around the iterative, document-heavy nature of design production.
A pull-planning platform built specifically for the design phase — not adapted from a tool made for site trades and construction crews.
LPS-Based Construction Tools
Aphex, Outbuild, LCMD
Genuinely built on Last Planner System principles — lookaheads, weekly work plans, reliability metrics — but oriented entirely around physical site coordination: staging, trade clashes, field crews, daily huddles.
The same pull-planning discipline these tools bring to the construction site, applied to design production — where the "site" is a set of interdependent drawings and disciplines, not a physical space.

Construction pull-planning brought real discipline to the job site. Dexec brings that same discipline to design — built from the ground up for interdependent deliverables, discipline handoffs, and progress you can actually measure.

Beta Program

Try the design-phase alternative

Full access is free during the beta, and founding users lock in a 50% lifetime discount when commercial pricing launches.

Request Beta AccessSee pricing