Team Capacity
Diagnostic
What This
Diagnostic Does
This diagnostic maps the structural capacity of a cross-functional team by analyzing role-weighted throughput ratios. It identifies where upstream production volume exceeds bottleneck execution capacity and surfaces the governance interventions required to protect the constraint.
The methodology draws on Sonnenberg's bandwidth model (Capacity - Admin - Meetings = Bandwidth) for individual capacity calculation and Goldratt's Theory of Constraints for bottleneck identification. The applied contribution is using role-weighted ratios to diagnose capacity imbalances in mixed-discipline teams where the problem isn't total workload but role asymmetry.
Web Experience
Team Assessment
| Role | Headcount | Effective FTE | Function | Backlog Pressure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product Owner | 2 | 2.0 | Strategy, roadmap, user stories, stakeholder alignment | Direct â generates scope continuously |
| UX Designer | 2 | 2.0 | Wireframes, prototypes, user research, design systems | Direct â every design requires engineering to ship |
| Analyst | 1 | 1.0 | Performance measurement, SEO, web operations, reporting | Indirect â measures output but doesn't generate backlog items |
| Full-Stack Engineer (Sr.) | 1 | 0.65 | Backend logic, API integration, data path architecture, vendor oversight | Constraint â sole person who understands 159-page fulfillment system. ~35% bandwidth consumed by mentoring |
| Front-End Engineer (Jr.) | 1 | 0.60 | UI implementation, front-end features | Dependent â requires mentorship from Sr. engineer, reducing both capacities |
Capacity
Constraints Identified
The role-weighted analysis surfaced three categories of structural constraint: single-point-of-failure risk, upstream overproduction and governance gaps.
Interventions
Designed
Each constraint mapped to a specific governance mechanism. The interventions were structural, not personal... designed to make capacity visible and non-negotiable regardless of who occupied the scrum master role.
| Constraint | Intervention | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|
| Single Point of Failure | Engineering Veto Power | Definition of Ready required Sr. Engineer sign-off before any story entered sprint backlog |
| Upstream Overproduction | Capacity-Based Grooming | Sprint capacity planned solely on engineering bandwidth. POs forced to stack-rank by ROI within that constraint |
| Invisible Mentorship Tax | Visible Capacity Accounting | Mentorship hours subtracted from available engineering FTE before sprint planning. Commitments based on real capacity (1.25 FTE) not headcount (2.0 FTE) |
| Executive Scope Bypass | Sprint Commitment Protection | New requests evaluated against current sprint commitments. If accepted, something else was explicitly removed. No silent additions |
| No Feasibility Gate | Technical Vetting Before Design | Backend data path confirmation required before design moved to high fidelity. Prevented the "design graveyard" effect |
What the
Governance Produced
These metrics were produced while the capacity protection model was active. The governance didn't ship features directly... it created the structural conditions under which the team could ship consistently for the first time.
Individual bandwidth calculation adapted from Nick Sonnenberg's CPR Framework (Come Up for Air, 2023). Bottleneck identification principles from Eliyahu Goldratt's Theory of Constraints. Sprint ceremony structure adapted from the Scrum Guide. The role-weighted capacity diagnostic and governance intervention mapping are applied contributions by Angie Bailey.
Connected
Diagnostics
Methodology from this engagement connects to diagnostic work in other case studies.