Why do site logistics experience gaps put Bosaso projects at risk?

Site logistics experience gaps in Bosaso put projects at risk because the person who plans material movement, access and storage has never run a site in this market. The work itself may be simple. What fails is the sequence: the load waits at the supplier, the blockwork gang waits at the gate, and the excavator blocks the only entry. The bid price rarely shows this gap.

How does a site logistics experience gap arise in Bosaso?

A logistics gap appears when the experience on the CV does not match the movement problem on this site. A supervisor may have run building work on a site with paved access, wide gates and supplier yards minutes away. On a plot with one gate, soft ground or a tight turning area, the same person may not know how a lorry gets in, where it waits, or which hour suits the route.

Ask the bidder who will run logistics day to day and what comparable site that person has handled. Ask whether the proposed supervisor has scheduled deliveries into a constrained plot, and ask to see how that was done. Clients add to it by judging experience from a company profile rather than from the named site team.

The mechanism is simple: planning material movement is a skill learned on comparable sites. Confirm with whoever controls the plot, whether that is the landowner or a local authority, which access routes and loading points apply. If no one on the team has moved materials through a site with similar access and storage constraints, treat that as an open risk.

What does the gap do to work on site?

Blocked work access is the first visible result. Deliveries queue outside, a lorry turns away, and the gang that was ready to pour stands idle. Storage is the second. Cement, rebar and blocks left in the open take dust and moisture, and handling damage rises when there is no laydown plan.

Sequencing then slips. Trades that should follow each other start together because there is nowhere to stage one of them, and the site becomes congested. Supervision spends the day directing traffic instead of checking work. Rework and idle time absorb the contingency, and the client sees delay without a clear cause.

The general practice is to separate access, storage and work zones on a drawn plan, and to confirm that plan against the project specification and the engineer's requirements. Storage and handling requirements depend on the site conditions the project actually has, so confirm the covering, stacking and ordering rules in the specification and with the supplier.

How do you detect and close the gap?

Walk a recent site with the proposed supervisor and ask what went wrong on it. Ask for delivery records or gate logs, not opinions. Ask three questions: where will lorries wait, where will cement and rebar sit, and who calls the supplier when a load is late. Vague answers show the gap faster than any reference check.

Then close it before mobilisation. Require a one-page logistics plan with a site layout, delivery windows, storage locations and a named person for access. Have that plan checked by the authority or counterparty who controls site access and delivery timing, together with the supplier, before mobilisation. Put the plan and the named role in the contract documents and check what the contract allows before changing scope or payment terms.

What to do next

Before award, walk one recent site with the proposed supervisor and ask for its gate log and delivery records. If the answers are thin, require a written logistics plan with a site layout, named responsibility for access and storage, and delivery windows, then have it checked by whoever controls site access and delivery timing, and by the supplier, before mobilisation starts.