Case study·Build-to-rent

Staff-to-unit capacity review

From a headcount argument — to a workload-grounded capacity review

11
Capacity bottlenecks quantifiedEach tied to a recurring workload driver and an asset
“It gave us a staffing conversation grounded in work, not headcount politics.”
Chief Operating Officer · BTR multifamily operator
UK BTR / multifamily operator·2,400 units across 5 operating assets·5-week pilot·United Kingdom
Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify
01Pilot envelope
Pilot length5 weeks
First signal8 days
First ROI30 days
Team alongside6 seats · 2 colleagues

5-week COO diagnostic; pulled workload, units and exception volumes; the colleague modelled hiring vs workflow scenarios.

02What it owns
Reports toChief Operating Officer, with finance and HR consulted on cost and contract assumptions.
Owns
  • Weekly capacity baseline — workload-per-unit and workload-per-FTE for every operating asset, source-linked
  • Bottleneck register — ranked list of where weekly workload exceeds available hours, with the recurring drivers named
  • Scenario model — hire vs workflow change vs do-nothing, compared against the same baseline and assumptions
  • Input pack for the COO/HR review — source-linked figures behind every scenario, refreshed before each session
  • Assumption ledger — every figure in the model traceable to the system it came from and the date it was pulled
Does not do
  • Hiring decisions — surfaces the case; the COO and HR decide
  • Individual performance assessment — operates on workload, not on named people
  • Pay, grading or contract recommendations — out of scope
Done looks like

The COO walks into the next staffing review with quantified bottlenecks and three comparable scenarios, not headcount politics. Finance and HR can challenge any number back to its source within one click.

03The team
AI teammates2
NoraReads RealPage work orders, HubSpot leasing tasks and Employment Hero rosters; builds the weekly capacity baseline per asset and ranks the bottlenecks.
RafaelMaintains the staffing model in Excel, runs hire-vs-workflow-vs-do-nothing scenarios against the baseline, and keeps every assumption linked to source.
Human team6
  • Chief Operating OfficerLeadership
  • Finance leadFinance
  • HR leadPeople
  • 2 Regional managersOperations
  • BI analystReporting
  • Operations analystOperations
04Connected stack
RealPageEmployment HeroHubSpotPower BIExcelWork-order feed
05What it returned
11Capacity bottlenecks quantifiedEach tied to a recurring workload driver and an asset
1.8 FTEWorkflow package proposedEquivalent capacity unlocked without new hires
£92kHiring case narrowedAnnualised cost taken out of the proposed regional headcount
  • Day 0
    Co-ordinator sessionCOO, finance, HR and BI agree workload definitions, FTE conventions and the three answerable questions for the diagnostic.
  • Day 8
    First signalNora completes the first read-only baseline across RealPage work orders, HubSpot leasing tasks and Employment Hero rosters; first bottleneck list shared.
  • Day 14
    Baseline reviewedRegional managers and the BI analyst correct two work-order-type mappings and one assumed-hours definition; baseline approved as the working source of truth.
  • Day 21
    Scenario model liveRafael graduates the Excel staffing model into a scenario view comparing one new hire, a workflow package, and do-nothing against the same baseline.
  • Day 26
    Executive workshopCOO, finance and HR walk the bottleneck register and the three scenarios; assumptions challenged back to source in the room.
  • Day 30
    ROI reviewCOO signs off the proposed workflow package equivalent to 1.8 FTE and the narrowed hiring case before it goes to the board.
↗Get started

Want this for your team?

Each design-partner pilot starts the same way: one workflow, the minimum useful context, and a first ROI signal measured in days.

Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify