In my experience, when an organization lacks an effective IT demand capacity model, several challenges can arise: resource imbalance, missed deadlines, budget overruns, quality issues, stakeholder frustration and risk of burnout to name a few. To mitigate these challenges, it seems organizations should invest in effective demand capacity models. How do you ensure effective capacity planning and management in your IT projects? What tools or strategies do you rely on to balance demand and capacity, prevent resource overutilization, and meet customer requirements?
Sort By:
Oldest
Chief Information Technology Officer in IT Services3 months ago
We rely heavily on Agile methodologies to balance demand and capacity in our companyHead of Transformation in Government3 months ago
The most successful strategy I have seen is a top down ceiling setting driven by targeted return on investment, and lined up with corporate strategy objectives. For example, sponsoring executives (automation, marketing, sales, etc.) have set multi-annual targets for return on technology investment. Handling R&D or innovation is a separate funding process and is also ceiling set. E.g. "we will set aside X thousands/millions/billions for innovation and speculative technology or process innovation." A third category, greenfielding new business capability and transformative investment is also handled in a similar way but in the same top-down strategic and targeted ceiling. And finally, infrastructure projects, the ones that are always called "strategic" and have very fuzzy return on investment are funded with a special review and separate programme that carefully prepares and reviews the business case. Once ceilings are set multi-annually, the annual work programme is filled by the cost of ongoing projects first (unless their milestone review forces a managed-by-numbers cancellation - something too few organisations do - shut down failing projects). Then new projects up to the ceiling - which forces competition, better analytical preparation (unless the selection is political) and greater management focus for good governance of fewer projects.
Looking out multi-annually also drives the debate, business case development, and strategic imperative to increase supply when the demand portfolio that has been well-filtered through the above governance requires increasing supply to meet the strategic demand.
Finally, a dedicated resourcing of statutory and small enhancements without the overhead of such governance acts both as a release valve and small enhancement and productivity gains in the organisation. This can be first-come-first served through agile or service management processes.
This approach works. But it requires an organisation that permits a top-down-culture and that is disciplined in strategy.
The alternative approach, as Didier Godot pointed out, is Agile. But at a corporate level, one gets to allocation of resources to Agile teams which have to face the same constraints, and so I would still argue for a top-down strategy governing the agile methodologies to ensure that the balance found between supply and demand is pushing the organisation forward in measurable and financially positive means. I believe you still can't replace the good old metrics defining sustainable, profitable, growth. So a secret sauce in the mix is the application of techniques to get rid of all the hot air that a business-case driven approach can fill up with.
Director of Project Management3 months ago
I agree this is a major challenge. we use a 3 year rolling model (each year we drop the current/prior year and add a future year) to forecast investment across our lines of business. prioritization is based on ROI/return of value based on some weighted combinations of hard dollar returns, CX improvement, risk mitigation, regulatory compliance, reduction in technical debt, mandatory maintenance and innovation. As a risk averse, not for profit monopoly, hard ROI is not always a driver except in terms of payback term < 5 years in gained efficiencies. gained efficiencies result in redeployment of staff to enhance service delivery rather than actual admin budget savings. Capacity in recent years is constrained more by people (attraction and retention of enough knowledge/expertise internally and by service providers) rather than hard opex/capex budgets. this presents a human risk in that most teams, being type As, will over promise in good faith in order to try and deliver for the business, leading to risks of burnout, fatigue, reduced CE time etc. development is both project/product based, using both waterfall and agile delivery. CIO / Managing Partner in Manufacturing3 months ago
There are different components to this so let’s break it down:- demand
- capacity
- project management
Demand
Proper management of the business demand, including prioritization, business budgeting etc.
Capacity
Ensuring you know the IT capacity, number of parallel projects IT can handle, but also the number of projects the business can handle. Building a forward looking roadmap.
Project Management
Proper management of the projects, good practices to avoid delays and properly manage resources of all kinds.
CIO in IT Services3 months ago
Personally, I try to push for the business within a business approach. It completely changes the conversation. If you want to dig deeper, check out How Organizations Should Work by Dean Meyer at https://www.amazon.com/Organizations-Should-Work-high-performing-entrepreneurs/dp/189260633X/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.bx0XTE88MkOdIiSQF-0aIn-FLbgECZHR6hJIXHiS4Ya5XsbyiUcCjGcN9IQ5uzvuYdDrWOEFqvS4kSMtkjMwjeDJ18mdh3HhHzB1l5eN_IB2b2rRFEHiFgriUysu-roiTtyOYKFyisdS-mkuNp1MtbEky1vbxRV08r1CAqnKj3fipf9xFWS6mi4ulbheHGr1jmw-GJ7ul6q8z27hwYLhzxUXB-Sn-Go7V8SZ-cgttXY.qT1B-flIU5hyPW05qUSwNtA6a9kKj0EFjKTRxM-lwxI&dib_tag=se&hvadid=694984954278&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9014901&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=12521364369021478788&hvtargid=kwd-1679128946858&hydadcr=22158_13541026&keywords=how+organizations+should+work&qid=1718716005&sr=8-1