Month end, and the operations lead is in Excel again
The partners want utilisation for the month by Friday. The operations lead exports timesheets, maps each time code to chargeable, business development, internal or leave, adjusts for the three consultants who booked to the wrong code, reconciles against the staffing sheet, and builds pivot tables. The numbers go into a slide. The partners ask why the strategy practice is low, and nobody can say whether it is bench time, proposal work or late timesheets.
By the time the figures are debated, the month they describe is two weeks behind.
Why utilisation is so hard to report
- Time codes do not map cleanly to chargeable and non-chargeable categories.
- Definitions differ: some count proposal time, some count available hours after leave, some do not.
- Leave and sickness are held in HR tools, not in the timesheet system.
- Late or incomplete timesheets distort the figures until the last one arrives.
- Staffing plans live in a separate spreadsheet, so future utilisation is guesswork.
For a consultancy, utilisation is one of the numbers that decides profitability. It deserves better than a monthly spreadsheet reconstruction.
There is also a trust issue. Consultants suspect utilisation figures are used against them, so some book generously to chargeable codes and others book proposal work to internal codes to avoid questions. The numbers then say more about habits than about the work.
What slow utilisation data costs
| Delay or gap | Effect |
|---|---|
| Figures two weeks old | Bench time noticed after it has been lost |
| Inconsistent definitions | Arguments about the numbers instead of action |
| No forward view | Hiring and associate decisions made on instinct |
| Operations time spent reconciling | Less time on the work that improves utilisation |
It also shapes behaviour in ways nobody intended. If the only utilisation conversation happens once a month, weeks after the fact, consultants on the bench are not given structured internal work or business development tasks early enough, and the firm pays for idle time it could have used.
How we build live utilisation
- We read time from your timesheet or professional services tool, such as Kantata, Harvest or a custom system, through its API or exports.
- Every time code is mapped once to your categories, agreed with the partners and written down.
- Leave, sickness and training come in from your HR system, so available hours are correct.
- Utilisation is calculated by consultant, grade and practice area, using your definitions, and updates as timesheets arrive.
- Missing timesheets are flagged, and figures are shown with a note on how complete they are.
- Staffing plans are read alongside, so the view shows the next few weeks' expected utilisation and upcoming roll-offs.
- A monthly pack is generated from the same data for the partners' meeting.
We keep your definitions visible next to the figures, so debates shift from what the number means to what to do about it.
We usually start by writing down the firm's definitions with the partners, in plain language, before building anything. That conversation often settles disputes that have run for years, and it means the first live figures are argued about far less.
What partners see week to week
Mid-month, the partners can see who is on the bench now and who rolls off an engagement in the next few weeks. Business development effort can be pointed at real gaps.
The operations lead spends month end checking exceptions, not building pivots.
Is this your month end?
- Utilisation is built in Excel from exports each month.
- Partners dispute the figures because definitions vary.
- Bench time is noticed after the fact.
- Leave is adjusted for by hand.
- There is no forward view of utilisation.