Part of the Insights series on the Mobtag platform.
In short: You do not “contractor manage” a fleet in email without paying for it in disputes. Permissions + tags mean the partner sees the surface they are paid to work—and your team keeps authority over the same serial.
The failure is usually over-sharing (they see contract pricing) or under-sharing (they invent a shadow sheet). The right pattern is: one record, a group for the contract, and field-level expectations your lawyer can name.
What a shared “graph” buys you
- The hierarchy of sites, cost centres, and parent/child equipment stays coherent when a third party adds rows.
- Map and depot context is not re-drawn in their favourite GIS once a week.
- Handover is a permission change, not a dump from their OneDrive to yours.
| Anti-pattern | Cost |
|---|---|
| Nightly secure FTP of “our truth” and “their truth” | Reconciliation, always late |
| The contractor’s Gantt as the only place status lives | You cannot answer the customer in one call |
| Everyone in one login | Data protection and the wrong people in finance fields |
Summary: Clarity on who can change what is as important as the tag on the item—get both right and the asset graph is something you can actually run, not a diagram on a whiteboard.