Capacity Planning: Balancing
Objective. Compare required and available capacity by skill and interval to expose the gaps a headline FTE balance hides, treating rebalancing moves as simulated.
This screen answers: once we know required and available, where are the real skill and interval gaps, and how could we rebalance? This is where a net-balanced headline is proven or broken.
See it in the demo
What this screen answers
The customer question is: beneath the headline balance, which skills and which intervals are short or long, and what rebalancing would close the gap. Both roles use it as the payoff screen - the one that turns a net number into real coverage.
The task
Compare required against available capacity by skill and interval for the scope, find the gaps, and inspect the rebalancing options the screen offers. The job is to read coverage at the level that matters, not at the headline.
How to read it
This is where the headline FTE balance breaks down into skill and interval reality. A plan that nets balanced can still be short of a skill at peak and long of another in the trough - the surpluses and shortfalls cancel in the total but not in the operation. The classic misread, the core one for this whole app, is believing the overall balance proves coverage. Read the gaps by skill and interval. And any rebalancing move shown here is simulated - it is a plan, not an executed change.
Honest limits
Balancing suggests; it does not publish a schedule or act within the day. Executing a rebalance is Scheduling, and reacting inside the live day is Intraday Management and RTA. Confirm the skills taxonomy and interval granularity against the customer's real operation so the gaps are meaningful.
Interpretation check
A net FTE balance can hide a skill short at peak and a surplus in the trough; coverage must be read by skill and interval here, and any rebalance shown is simulated, not executed.
In the field
For a KnackGlobal-scale RCM operation, balancing is where a net-balanced quarterly plan reveals a scarce-skill shortfall at peak - the gap that a headline FTE number would have let the operation walk straight into.
Practical task
On the balancing view for a scope, find one skill/interval gap the headline total hides, and write one line distinguishing the simulated rebalance from what Scheduling would have to execute.
Self-check
The headline nets balanced but balancing shows a peak-interval skill gap. Which is true?
Both - and the gap is what matters. Surpluses and shortfalls cancel in the total but not in the operation, so coverage is a skill-and-interval question, not a headline one.
Is a rebalancing move on this screen an executed change?
No. It is simulated - a plan. Executing it is Scheduling, and acting within the live day is Intraday Management and RTA.
Why is this the most important screen for the app's core misread?
Because it is where the net FTE balance is proven or broken against real skill/interval coverage - the exact misread the whole application warns against.
Verified vs demo. Screen is live in the demo at /#/balancing; exact controls and figures are SME-validation-pending.