PortfolioEL-03

Engagement Leadership · Control room

Capacity & Resourcing Planner

SIMULATEDVerified Jul 2, 2026

Thirty people, five short — but only in three skills. The heatmap shows where the portfolio is over-allocated; the toggles show what hire, contract, or upskill each does to the date and the cost. This one is personal — it mirrors a 31-resource intelligence mapping I ran.

Team
30 FTE

7 FTE short in skills

Delivery
~30 wk

+10 wk vs plan

Monthly cost
$480k

base team

Unresolved gaps
3/3

Over-allocated skills

Skill utilization · demand ÷ capacity

ML Engineering

demand 9 · capacity 6 · 150%

Data Engineering

demand 7 · capacity 5 · 140%

MLOps / Platform

demand 4 · capacity 4 · 100%

balanced
Delivery / PM

demand 4 · capacity 5 · 80%

+1 slack
Domain SME

demand 5 · capacity 6 · 83%

+1 slack
QA / Eval

demand 6 · capacity 4 · 150%

Tick mark = current capacity line. Bars past it are over-allocated. Hire = +6 wk / $18k·FTE · Contract = +1 wk / $28k · Upskill = +4 wk / $8k (draws on slack).

Bottleneck: ML Engineering

The plan doesn't fail on headcount — it fails in ML Engineering, Data Engineering, QA / Eval. Contract is fastest to the date, upskill is cheapest but leans on the slack in Delivery and SME, hiring is permanent but adds six weeks. Pick per constraint, not per habit.

Steering-committee takeaway: Capacity plans fail on skills, not headcount. Thirty people ≠ thirty people.

Resume echo — a direct mirror of the 31-resource AMEX intelligence mapping; the most personal instrument on the site.

How this is built

Utilization = demand ÷ effective capacity per skill. Resolving a gap adds its shortfall as capacity; delivery slip = the worst gap's overflow (unresolved) or its resolution lead time (resolved). Monthly cost = base team + Σ(gap × resolution rate).

Stack: Next.js (static) + shared design system; deterministic client-side.

Limitations: skills are aggregated pools, not named individuals; upskill assumes the slack is transferable. It exposes the skill-shaped bottleneck and the trade, not a resource-levelled schedule.