MTD Capacity Pressure Test

What did the first MTD quarterly cycle consume, and where will the pressure increase? Answer from your own volumes and handling, and this estimates where capacity is going — on your inputs, with your uncertainty, not ours.

Before you start

What this is, and what it is not

  • An estimate of what your own numbers imply about avoidable effort in one workflow.
  • A statement of how confident that estimate can be, given where your numbers came from.
  • A list of the assumptions doing the most work, and the evidence that would settle them.
  • Capable of concluding that there is probably not enough concentrated avoidable work to justify investigating further — and it says so when your inputs imply it.
  • A saving. Nothing here is money you will recover, and the tool never says it is.
  • A measurement. It runs on what you tell it, and it is exactly as good as that.
  • A substitute for the engagement. Establishing what the workflow actually costs, and which intervention is justified, is what the Evidence Sprint is for.
  • A benchmark. There is no peer comparison here, and there will not be one until the sample supports it.
Your inputs

Six numbers and two answers

Loads the published synthetic accountancy figures, so you can see how the result reads before answering anything. Its two drivers apportion the published model's single avoidable-minutes figure — 40 minutes chasing and 20 minutes exception handling — so the total is exactly the published one. Synthetic demonstration case: not a client, and not a result.

Annualised at 4 cycles a year, which is the only assumption applied to this number.

Where does this number come from?

Chasing

Pursuing records, authorisation or answers that did not arrive complete.

Where does this number come from?
Where does this number come from?

Exception handling

Working a case that has gone off the standard path — repair, re-categorisation, referral back.

Where does this number come from?
Where does this number come from?

Salary, employment costs and overhead. Not a charge-out rate.

Where does this number come from?
Do the same two or three problems cause most of the repair work?

"We don't know" is a legitimate answer, and a common one. It is named as an evidence gap in the result rather than treated as a missing input.

What are you already seeing? Select any that apply.

These do not enter the calculation. They separate a theoretical number from operational pain.

What happens to these answers. Your answers and the result are stored so the result can be reproduced if the calculation changes. Nothing identifies you: there is no account, no cookie and no tracking across visits, and the session reference exists only to show you this result. Nothing is sent anywhere until you press the button.

Pressure-test this against the real workflow

Discuss a workflow