Marketing Resource Planning | How to Allocate People and Effort Across Campaigns
Published:
Last Updated:
Category: Campaign Management
Published:
Last Updated:
Category: Campaign Management
Authors: Shusaku Yosa
The budget is allocated, but who works on what gets decided by feel. Once the quarter starts, particular people end up carrying several campaigns and everything slows down. Marketing resource planning is difficult because human capacity behaves differently from budget. This article covers the judgments involved in allocating people and effort across campaigns.
A premise worth settling first. Human capacity cannot be treated the way budget is.
Budget unspent this month can sometimes roll into next month. Human capacity simply disappears. Ten person-days going unused this month does not add ten person-days to next month.
So anything left idle is a straight loss, and any shortfall cannot be made up later. The habit of adjusting across the year, which works for budget, does not apply here. That is what makes resource planning hard.
A million yen can go to any campaign; a person cannot. A designer being free does not fill a gap in paid media operations.
Judge from the total alone — "the team has forty person-days spare, so we are fine" — and one particular role becomes the bottleneck at execution. Allocation has to be examined role by role.
Sorting campaigns by type before allocating makes the plan easier to build.
Paid media, social, email — work that needs a steady level of attention throughout the period. Effort arrives at roughly the same volume every week.
The thing to watch is that this capacity does not disappear until you stop the campaign. When adding something new, what you actually have available is the remainder after subtracting the existing ongoing work.
Events, campaigns, site builds — work with a start and an end. Effort concentrates in specific periods.
Knowing where the peaks fall matters. For the same total effort, whether the peaks overlap or spread out changes how many people you need.
Capacity that never appears in the plan but always materialises. Requests from other departments, incident response, urgent material to prepare.
Leave this out of the plan and the plan will break. Deriving a percentage from past experience and reserving it as a block up front is the realistic approach.
The order in step two matters. Fill in the new campaigns first and the plan completes without anyone noticing that the existing operations have been squeezed.
On a marketing team, one person holding several campaigns is normal. There is a trap here.
Arithmetically, one person can be split 0.5, 0.3, and 0.2 across three campaigns. In practice, every switch between campaigns costs time to change mental context.
As a guide, three concurrent campaigns per person is the ceiling. Past four, the switching cost stops being negligible and every campaign slows down.
Even when the same person holds three campaigns, dividing the period reduces the switching. Concentrate on campaign A in the first half, then move to campaign B.
Concentrating in sequence over defined periods gets more done than sitting at 0.3 on three campaigns permanently, for the same total effort.
The third gets missed most. A campaign launched six months ago that is still running is still consuming capacity every month. Without a periodic review and a decision to stop things, you eventually have no effort left for anything new.
When the allocation shows there is not enough effort, only three moves exist.
What gets overlooked in the second is that outsourcing leaves the management effort behind. Direction and review still happen in-house. Not all of it lifts away.
Presenting these three to the stakeholders and drawing out a decision is where the resource planner's job ends. Take it away as "we will find a way to do everything" and everything ends up half-finished at execution.
Monthly is the practical unit. Weekly improves accuracy but the maintenance effort makes it unsustainable. Quarterly hides the overlapping peaks.
You are probably not recording actuals. Knowing how many person-days a similar past campaign took improves accuracy considerably. Start rough — just record the actuals of campaigns as they finish.
It varies widely by team, so deriving it from your own history is safest. If you want a starting point, set aside 10 to 20 percent of the total and adjust based on whether it holds.
In the short term it makes things slower, because bringing new members up to speed consumes existing members' time. Adding headcount works for plans looking several months out. It will not fill this month's shortfall.
A resource plan is not finished once it is built. It has to be set against actual consumption, with the gaps found and adjusted continuously.
When the plan lives in a spreadsheet, the actuals in timesheets, and campaign progress in yet another tracker, every reconciliation means re-keying. Xtrategy manages campaign schedules alongside budget and KPIs on a single screen, so you can track several campaigns at once.
What helps most in resource planning is getting the usable effort right. Take headcount times working days at face value and you will always come up short. Start by counting how much your existing ongoing campaigns consume each month.
Automating marketing workflows, organised by the cause of rework. Distinguishes this from MA, covers the three causes — ...
How to design marketing approval workflows using criteria beyond spend. Covers the four approval categories — budget, ex...
The ten knowledge areas from PMBOK Guide 6th Edition, listed and explained. Covers why they were replaced by performance...
