Multi-Project Resource Allocation | Balance Workloads
Multi-project resource allocation balances capacity across teams. GitScrum provides workload visibility, tracks allocations, and prevents over-commitment.
9 min read
Managing resources across projects requires visibility and planning. GitScrum helps teams allocate capacity across projects with workload views, capacity planning, and utilization tracking.
Resource Challenges
Common Problems
MULTI-PROJECT RESOURCE ISSUES:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ OVER-ALLOCATION: │
│ "Alex is assigned to 3 projects at 50% each" │
│ → 150% allocation = burnout and missed deadlines │
│ │
│ CONTEXT SWITCHING: │
│ "Sarah works on Project A, B, and C daily" │
│ → 40% of time lost to switching between contexts │
│ │
│ INVISIBLE COMMITMENTS: │
│ "I didn't know Jordan was already fully booked" │
│ → Hidden allocations lead to surprises │
│ │
│ PRIORITY CONFLICTS: │
│ "Both projects say they're the top priority" │
│ → Unclear priorities = context switching │
│ │
│ UNPLANNED WORK: │
│ "Support requests keep pulling people off projects" │
│ → No buffer for interruptions │
│ │
│ SKILL MISMATCHES: │
│ "Only one person knows the payment system" │
│ → Bottlenecks on specific individuals │
│ │
│ RESULT: │
│ • Projects delayed │
│ • Team stressed │
│ • Quality suffers │
│ • Commitments missed │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Context Switching Cost
THE REAL COST OF SPLITTING TIME:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ EXPECTED VS ACTUAL PRODUCTIVITY: │
│ │
│ Projects │ Expected │ Actual │ Lost │
│ ─────────┼──────────────┼─────────────┼────────────── │
│ 1 │ 100% │ 100% │ 0% │
│ 2 │ 50% + 50% │ 40% + 40% │ 20% │
│ 3 │ 33% × 3 │ 20% × 3 │ 40% │
│ 4 │ 25% × 4 │ 10% × 4 │ 60% │
│ 5 │ 20% × 5 │ 5% × 5 │ 75% │
│ │
│ WHY THIS HAPPENS: │
│ │
│ • Time to remember where you left off │
│ • Mental energy depleted by switching │
│ • Meetings multiply with each project │
│ • Communication overhead increases │
│ • No deep work possible │
│ │
│ IDEAL STATE: │
│ • 1 primary project (80% focus) │
│ • 1 secondary project (20% focus) │
│ • Clean handoffs, not constant switching │
│ │
│ IF SOMEONE IS ON 3+ PROJECTS: │
│ → They're effective on none of them │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Allocation Strategies
Capacity Planning
CAPACITY PLANNING APPROACH:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ STEP 1: DETERMINE AVAILABLE CAPACITY │
│ │
│ Person: Alex (Full-time) │
│ Work days in month: 22 │
│ Hours per day: 8 │
│ Total capacity: 176 hours │
│ │
│ SUBTRACT OVERHEAD: │
│ • Meetings/ceremonies: -16 hours (10%) │
│ • Support rotation: -16 hours (10%) │
│ • PTO this month: -8 hours (1 day) │
│ • Buffer for unplanned: -18 hours (10%) │
│ ───────────────────────────────── │
│ Allocatable capacity: 118 hours │
│ │
│ STEP 2: ALLOCATE TO PROJECTS │
│ │
│ Project Alpha: 80 hours (68%) │
│ Project Beta: 38 hours (32%) │
│ Total: 118 hours (100%) │
│ │
│ RULES: │
│ • Never exceed 100% allocatable capacity │
│ • Max 2 projects per person │
│ • One project should have majority focus │
│ • Review and adjust weekly │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Allocation Models
RESOURCE ALLOCATION MODELS:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ MODEL 1: DEDICATED TEAMS │
│ │
│ Project A: Team of 4 (100% dedicated) │
│ Project B: Team of 3 (100% dedicated) │
│ Project C: Team of 3 (100% dedicated) │
│ │
│ ✅ No context switching │
│ ✅ Clear ownership │
│ ✅ Team builds velocity │
│ ❌ Inflexible │
│ ❌ May not have right skills │
│ │
│ MODEL 2: MATRIX (Shared Resources) │
│ │
│ Alex: Project A (50%) + Project B (50%) │
│ Jordan: Project B (50%) + Project C (50%) │
│ Maria: Project A (100%) │
│ │
│ ✅ Flexible skill matching │
│ ✅ Cross-project knowledge │
│ ❌ Context switching overhead │
│ ❌ Unclear priorities │
│ │
│ MODEL 3: HYBRID │
│ │
│ Core team dedicated to each project │
│ Specialists shared as needed │
│ Clear primary/secondary assignments │
│ │
│ ✅ Best of both worlds │
│ ✅ Requires good planning │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Workload Visibility
Team Allocation View
GITSCRUM WORKLOAD VIEW:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Team Allocation - January 2024 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ Person │ Project A │ Project B │ Project C │ Total │
│ ───────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────│
│ Alex │ ████ 80% │ │ ██ 20% │ 100% ✅ │
│ Jordan │ │ ████ 100% │ │ 100% ✅ │
│ Maria │ ██ 40% │ ██ 40% │ ██ 40% │ 120% ⚠️ │
│ Sam │ ██████100%│ │ │ 100% ✅ │
│ Taylor │ │ ██ 50% │ ██ 30% │ 80% ✅ │
│ │
│ PROJECT CAPACITY: │
│ Project A: 220% of person (2.2 people) │
│ Project B: 190% of person (1.9 people) │
│ Project C: 90% of person (0.9 people) │
│ │
│ ⚠️ ALERTS: │
│ • Maria is over-allocated (120%) │
│ • Taylor has 20% unallocated │
│ │
│ [Adjust Allocations] [View by Week] [Export] │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Sprint-Level View
SPRINT WORKLOAD BREAKDOWN:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Sprint 24 - Team Workload │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ ALEX (Capacity: 40 points) │
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│
│ │ Project A: 32 points ││
│ │ [████████████████████████████░░░░] ││
│ │ ├── Payment integration (13 pts) ││
│ │ ├── API refactoring (8 pts) ││
│ │ └── Bug fixes (11 pts) ││
│ │ ││
│ │ Project C: 8 points ││
│ │ [████████] ││
│ │ └── Review and support (8 pts) ││
│ │ ││
│ │ Total: 40/40 points (100%) ││
│ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘│
│ │
│ MARIA (Capacity: 35 points) │
│ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│
│ │ ⚠️ OVER-ALLOCATED: 42/35 points (120%) ││
│ │ ││
│ │ Project A: 18 points ││
│ │ Project B: 14 points ││
│ │ Project C: 10 points ││
│ │ ││
│ │ RECOMMENDATION: Move 7 points to Taylor ││
│ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘│
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Managing Conflicts
Priority Decisions
RESOLVING RESOURCE CONFLICTS:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ CONFLICT: Alex needed on both Project A and B │
│ │
│ STEP 1: ESCALATE TO DECISION MAKER │
│ Who owns the priority call? │
│ (Not the individual contributor) │
│ │
│ STEP 2: COMPARE IMPACT │
│ │
│ Project A needs Alex for: │
│ • Payment system (only Alex knows it) │
│ • Impact if delayed: Can't launch feature │
│ • Timeline impact: 2-week delay │
│ │
│ Project B needs Alex for: │
│ • Performance optimization │
│ • Impact if delayed: Slower experience │
│ • Timeline impact: 1-week delay │
│ │
│ STEP 3: MAKE DECISION │
│ Decision: Alex focuses on Project A │
│ Reason: Blocking launch vs quality improvement │
│ │
│ STEP 4: COMMUNICATE │
│ • Project B team informed of delay │
│ • Alternative explored (can someone else help?) │
│ • Timeline adjusted │
│ │
│ STEP 5: DOCUMENT │
│ Record decision and reasoning │
│ Prevent same conflict from recurring │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Protecting Capacity
CAPACITY PROTECTION STRATEGIES:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ STRATEGY 1: CAPACITY BUFFER │
│ • Only allocate 80% of capacity │
│ • 20% reserved for unplanned work │
│ • Prevents over-commitment │
│ │
│ STRATEGY 2: "NO" BY DEFAULT │
│ • New requests go to backlog, not current sprint │
│ • Adding work = removing other work │
│ • Force prioritization trade-offs │
│ │
│ STRATEGY 3: FOCUS PERIODS │
│ • Assign projects in blocks (not slices) │
│ • "January = Project A, February = Project B" │
│ • Reduces context switching │
│ │
│ STRATEGY 4: SHARED RESOURCE LIMITS │
│ • Max 20% of team can be shared │
│ • Rest are dedicated │
│ • Limits cross-project coordination │
│ │
│ STRATEGY 5: ON-CALL ROTATION │
│ • Dedicated person for interruptions each sprint │
│ • Protects others' focus │
│ • Rotate fairly │
│ │
│ STRATEGY 6: VISIBLE ALLOCATION │
│ • Everyone can see everyone's allocation │
│ • No hidden commitments │
│ • Easy to spot conflicts │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Tracking & Adjustment
Weekly Review
WEEKLY ALLOCATION REVIEW:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ REVIEW QUESTIONS: │
│ │
│ 1. IS ANYONE OVER-ALLOCATED? │
│ • Check actual vs planned hours │
│ • Look for overtime patterns │
│ • Signs of stress or burnout │
│ │
│ 2. IS ANYONE UNDER-UTILIZED? │
│ • Unassigned capacity │
│ • Blocked and waiting │
│ • Could help other projects │
│ │
│ 3. ARE ALLOCATIONS MATCHING REALITY? │
│ • Planned 50% on Project A │
│ • Actually spending 70%? │
│ • Adjust allocations to match │
│ │
│ 4. ARE PRIORITIES STILL CORRECT? │
│ • Did anything change this week? │
│ • New urgent work? │
│ • Project priorities shifted? │
│ │
│ 5. LOOKING AHEAD │
│ • Any PTO upcoming? │
│ • Key milestones approaching? │
│ • Need to shift resources? │
│ │
│ OUTPUT: Adjusted allocations for next week │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘