How do you handle jobs that need multiple visits?

Pro tip: we stopped creating separate WOs entirely. Single work order, multiple appointments scheduled in the Appointments section. Key is training your dispatchers to always check for existing open WOs before creating new ones — we made that part of our dispatch protocol checklist.

The real game-changer was getting our field lead (me) to update the WO notes immediately after each visit with what happened and what's next. Techs now know to read the full history before starting. Took about three months of nagging but now it's muscle memory.

One gotcha: if you're using the customer portal, they'll see all appointments listed separately. We just tell them upfront it's a multi-phase project.

This is helpful — thanks Josh. Do you use any custom statuses to flag which phase you're in, or just rely on appointment dates and notes?

We use statuses but honestly they're pretty generic — "In Progress," "Waiting on Parts," "Ready for Final." The appointment title carries more weight. I put the phase right in there: "HVAC Rough-In - Phase 2 of 4." Techs see that on their mobile before they even open the job.

Also worth noting: we trained customers to expect one point of contact (usually me or the dispatcher) for scheduling the whole sequence. Prevents the "I thought someone was coming Tuesday" confusion.

In my experience the single-WO approach falls apart when phases stretch past 30 days. We've had jobs sit open for two months waiting on permits or inspections — clutters up every report, skews your completion metrics.

We use parent/child WOs now. Parent stays open until final signoff, children are the individual visits. More overhead but at least you can close and invoice per phase without losing the thread.

Downside: FieldPulse doesn't have true parent/child linking, so we're using a custom field for parent WO number. Not elegant but it works.

Another way to think about it — and this depends on whether your billing model is milestone-based or time-and-materials — is using service agreements for the overall project container, with individual work orders underneath. From a reporting standpoint, this gives you both granular visit data and project-level visibility.

The tradeoff, as Art notes, is additional administrative overhead. We've found it worthwhile for projects exceeding $15K or spanning more than six weeks.

Quick setup that worked for us:

• Custom field: "Project Phase" (Rough-In, Trim, Commission, Final)
• Custom field: "Total Phases" so techs know if they're 2 of 4
• Photo requirement at each phase close — forces documentation
• Dispatch view filtered by "Multi-Visit = Yes" so these don't get buried

We're billing per phase so we do need separate WOs. The key was standardizing the naming convention: "[Project ID] - [Phase] - [Address]." Makes search actually functional.

okay so basically what we do is just i mean its not perfect but we have a shared google sheet that tracks the project phases and who's assigned and then when i get to the job i look at the sheet and also the previous work order notes but honestly the notes are hit or miss because some guys write novels and some guys write "done" so what i really need is the photos and basically if the photos are there im good to go

we tried the single WO thing but customers kept calling confused about why their job was still open when we "finished" already so we went back to separate ones

...Google sheet. In 2025.

Anyway. We use the checklist templates for handoff. Required field at end of each visit: "What does the next tech need to know?" Forces the conversation.

Still get the occasional "done" but at least there's a prompt.

We want to make sure you're set up for success with multi-visit workflows — this is a theme we're hearing from a lot of teams right now.

A few of you mentioned the parent/child gap, and I can share that we're exploring native project containers that would let you group related work orders without the custom field workaround. Nothing committed to the roadmap yet, but it's on our radar.

In the meantime, I'd love to hear more about how you're currently handling billing across phases — is it typically milestone-based, time-and-materials per visit, or something else? The more context we have, the better we can shape what's next.

Feel free to reply here or drop ideas in our feature wishlist thread if you prefer. We're listening!

Thanks Carla — good to know it's on the radar. For us it's mixed: some customers want milestone invoicing, others prefer net-30 after full completion. The fragmentation is definitely the headache.

Would love a native project view that shows completion % across phases and lets you bill either way.