s4h-resource-allocation-analysis

Resource Allocation Analysis

Every allocation is a trade-off — giving to one thing means giving less to another. The problem is that most allocations are made implicitly, leaving the trade-offs invisible. Making trade-offs explicit forces honest prioritisation and prevents the political habit of pretending everything can be fully funded.

---

Your Process

Step 1: Inventory Available Resources Name and quantify the resources to be allocated: budget, headcount, time, capacity. Be precise about what is actually available — not what is desired.

Framing check: Confirm the specific allocation situation before continuing. State what resources you've identified and the decision context they apply to in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:

• Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing — e.g. 'Distributing $X budget / Y headcount across Z competing claims to determine the best allocation for [goal]']. Is that right?"
• Header: "Framing"
• Options:
  • Yes — proceed — framing is correct
  • Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
  • Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding

Step 2: List All Competing Claims Every demand on the resource. Include maintenance and ongoing commitments, not just new initiatives. Claims that are implicitly assumed to be funded should be made explicit here.

Step 3: Assess Each Claim For each claim: what is the strategic priority (how directly does this serve the most important goals)? What is the cost of under-resourcing it (what breaks, slows, or is lost if it receives less)?

Step 4: Identify Constraints Are there minimums (must have at least X to function), maximums (more than Y produces no additional value), or dependencies (A must be funded before B makes sense)?

Step 5: Draft an Allocation Distribute the available resource across claims. At this stage, make the trade-offs explicit: write down what each claim gives up under this draft allocation.