New Research Shows Resource Over Commitment Epidemic Within IT and Product Development

AUSTIN, Texas – July 18, 2016

New research announced today reveals lack of capacity planning in the approval process for new projects is perpetuating the epidemic of over commitment of resources – the people to do the work, impacting an organization’s ability to deliver projects on time, and ultimately resulting in the inability to innovate fast enough.

According to the 2016 Resource Management and Capacity Planning Benchmark Study, conducted by Appleseed Partners and sponsored by Planview, organizations that are mature in capacity planning are 47 percent more likely to have a comprehensive view into both pipeline demand and capacity to evaluate whether to take on new projects, and to run strategic what-if scenarios to evaluate new opportunities and support decision-making. As a result, 80 percent of mature organizations are able to respond to new innovation opportunities in hours or days instead of weeks or months. In addition, higher maturity organizations reduce time-to-market risks by 16 percent.

In contrast, only 31 percent of lower maturity organizations consider capacity most or all of the time in their project approval processes, and another 19 percent never do. Of those that do evaluate capacity, 58 percent say it takes weeks or months to determine whether or not there is enough resource capacity to take on a new project due to lack of visibility into portfolio demand and capacity. As a result, lower maturity organizations are in the midst of a costly over-commitment epidemic by making decisions without information about the capacity to deliver.

“Not enough companies are connecting the dots about the impact of resource over-commitment and the ability to deliver on innovation to meet growth objectives,” said Maureen Carlson, partner, Appleseed Partners and chief researcher on the study. “The research shows that companies are working on products or projects that are at risk of delayed delivery because there was not enough capacity to take them on in the first place. Mature organizations are in a position to evaluate capacity in real time to make critical business tradeoffs and see continued investment in this area as a competitive differentiator.”

A senior manager at a global consumer packaged goods that has successfully advanced their level of maturity commented in the survey, “We went from needing eight weeks to only two to three days to evaluate capacity to take on new projects.”

“The contrast between businesses that embrace capacity planning and those that do not is so profound that lower maturity organizations are consistently putting their operations at high risk,” said Patrick Tickle, chief product officer, Planview. “Capacity-centered organizations understand the economics of business innovation and digital transformation from a resource capacity perspective and reap the benefits of progressing from blind investments and decision fire drills to knowing precisely what resources are available, where they are applied, and how they can best be tapped to fuel growth objectives.”

To learn more about the study methodology and demographics, and receive access to findings in the executive insight report, visit Planview.com/RMCPto learn more about the 2016 State of Resource Management and Capacity Planning Benchmark Study.

Additional Resources

Overview of the 2016 Resource Management and Capacity Planning Benchmark Study by Chief Study Researcher, Maureen Carlson

About the Resource Management and Capacity Planning Benchmark Study

The online quantitative survey was conducted by Appleseed Partners. More than 400 leaders from across the globe in product development, IT and enterprise program management responded to questions about their ability and speed of making capacity-centered decisions across their portfolios. The study looked at pain points and business risks correlated to maturity level and uncovered the characteristics, leading practices and technology tools in use by the most mature organizations. Level One maturity implied a limited understanding of capacity or demand beyond existing resources, while Level Five maturity meant regular assessment of capacity and demand using up-to-date data.

Press Inquiries

Per Holmlund

Senior Public Relations Manager

Planview

+46 73 156 03 12
[email protected]