Time and Activity: Utilization
Objective. Read a utilisation figure correctly: name its numerator and denominator, and explain why it is not a measure of output or business productivity.
Utilisation answers 'of the available hours, how much went to productive activity?' This is the screen most often misread as 'productivity', so the whole task is reading it with the right denominator and the right ceiling on what it claims.
See it in the demo
What this screen answers
After attendance tells you presence and available hours, utilisation asks how those available hours were spent: what share went to activity classified as productive. It helps a manager see whether available capacity is being engaged - a different question from whether people showed up, and a different question again from whether they produced value.
The task
Scope to a team and period and read utilisation alongside, not instead of, the available-hours figure it depends on. The task is to always pair the percentage with its base: a high utilisation on very low available hours is a different story from the same percentage on a full day. Read the trend and the distribution, not a single headline number.
How to read it
Two guardrails. The denominator is available hours, not scheduled hours - the same activity looks like very different utilisation depending on which base is used, so confirm which one is configured. Utilisation is activity-based availability, not output. A team can be 80% utilised and still produce little of value; that question belongs to Work Output. The headline misread - 'utilisation was high so the team was productive' - conflates two different measures.
Honest limits
Utilisation depends on how activity is classified as productive, which is configurable and customer-specific - do not treat the demo classification as fact. It says nothing about the quality, complexity or completion of work. Never promise a utilisation uplift number; the honest value is that the customer will see how available time is used and set their own target from their own baseline.
Interpretation check
Utilisation is productive activity over available hours - not output, not business productivity, and not against scheduled hours. A high figure can sit on top of low-value work; that is a Work Output question, not a utilisation claim.
In the field
KnackGlobal: utilisation visibility shows whether paid available hours are being engaged, but the displacement case is won on output per FTE and cost per claim - so utilisation is framed as a capacity signal, never as the productivity proof itself.
Practical task
On the demo utilisation view, pick one team and write its reading as: utilisation %, its denominator (available hours), the base size, and the explicit statement that this is not a measure of output.
Self-check
A customer says 'utilisation was 78%, so the team was productive.' Correct it in one line.
78% is productive activity over available hours, not useful output. A team can be 78% utilised and produce little of value; output belongs to Work Output, and check the denominator is available, not scheduled, hours.
Why does the same activity give different utilisation figures?
Because the denominator can be available hours or scheduled hours, and productive classification is configurable. Confirm both before comparing numbers.
What should you never promise from this screen?
A specific utilisation uplift percentage. The honest value is visibility of how available time is used; the customer sets improvement targets from their own baseline.
Verified vs demo. Screen is live in the demo at /#/utilization; exact controls and figures are SME-validation-pending.