We’ve Never Had an Issue Here Before
Why past performance doesn’t guarantee future conditions
“We’ve never had an issue here before” is usually said with confidence.
It’s also one of the least reliable indicators of what’s about to happen on a project.
Where that thinking comes from
Past performance feels like good data. If something has worked before—same site, same area, or similar conditions—it’s easy to assume it will work again.
Sometimes that assumption holds. But in geotechnical work, conditions are rarely identical from one project to the next. Even within the same site, subsurface conditions can vary more than expected.
What worked before doesn’t necessarily represent what’s there now.
What actually changes
Soil conditions vary across short distances. Groundwater levels shift with time and weather. Previous construction activity alters subsurface behavior. Even differences in loading, layout, or sequencing can change how the ground responds.
None of these factors need to be extreme to create a different outcome. Small changes are often enough.
Why it becomes a problem
Relying on past experience tends to reduce scrutiny. Investigation scope may be limited. Assumptions carry more weight than they should. Risk is treated as lower because “it’s worked before.”
When conditions don’t match those expectations, the adjustment happens during construction—where changes are more expensive and harder to manage.
What actually helps
Past projects are useful, but they should be treated as context—not confirmation. Each project still needs to be evaluated based on its own conditions, with an understanding of where variability might exist.
That means verifying assumptions, not carrying them forward.
Final thought
“We’ve never had an issue here before” isn’t evidence that nothing will go wrong.
It’s usually just a sign that conditions haven’t been tested in the same way yet.
About the Author
Nathan McNallie is a geotechnical consultant focused on report review, construction advisory, and identifying project risk before it becomes a field issue.
“We’ve never had an issue here before” is usually said with confidence.
It’s also one of the least reliable indicators of what’s about to happen on a project.
Where that thinking comes from
Past performance feels like good data. If something has worked before—same site, same area, or similar conditions—it’s easy to assume it will work again.
Sometimes that assumption holds. But in geotechnical work, conditions are rarely identical from one project to the next. Even within the same site, subsurface conditions can vary more than expected.
What worked before doesn’t necessarily represent what’s there now.
What actually changes
Soil conditions vary across short distances. Groundwater levels shift with time and weather. Previous construction activity alters subsurface behavior. Even differences in loading, layout, or sequencing can change how the ground responds.
None of these factors need to be extreme to create a different outcome. Small changes are often enough.
Why it becomes a problem
Relying on past experience tends to reduce scrutiny. Investigation scope may be limited. Assumptions carry more weight than they should. Risk is treated as lower because “it’s worked before.”
When conditions don’t match those expectations, the adjustment happens during construction—where changes are more expensive and harder to manage.
What actually helps
Past projects are useful, but they should be treated as context—not confirmation. Each project still needs to be evaluated based on its own conditions, with an understanding of where variability might exist.
That means verifying assumptions, not carrying them forward.
Final thought
“We’ve never had an issue here before” isn’t evidence that nothing will go wrong.
It’s usually just a sign that conditions haven’t been tested in the same way yet.
About the Author
Nathan McNallie is a geotechnical consultant focused on report review, construction advisory, and identifying project risk before it becomes a field issue.
