Welcome back to our series on Seven Ways to Build Teams That Deliver. Throughout this series, we are exploring the practical leadership habits and frameworks that help organisations build clearer direction, stronger alignment and more effective execution across teams.

So far we’ve covered how vision shapes team performance and how effective two way communication can connect strategy to delivery. 

This week we turn our focus to resource allocation. Specifically, not whether you have enough resources, but how well they are directed at the work that matters most.

Why Projects Struggle Despite Having Enough Resources

There is often an awareness amongst leaders that their organisation has the resources available to execute projects, but uncertainty around whether those resources are aligned around the right priorities and contributing to overall business objectives. This is often where the distinction between capacity and focus becomes more visible.

When progress slows or priorities begin to compete, the assumption is often that additional resources are needed. In many cases, however, organisations already have much of the capability required to move forward. The greater opportunity lies in creating clearer alignment around priorities and helping teams direct their time and energy towards activity that supports longer-term operational goals, sustainable improvement and more consistent results.

What Inefficient Resource Allocation Looks Like 

To understand what effective resource allocation looks like, it is often helpful to recognise the signs of ineffective allocation first. 

In many organisations, the issue is not a lack of effort or capability, but how time, attention and resources become distributed across day-to-day activity.

Consider a functional manager within a manufacturing business leading a small team. Senior leaders have agreed that the priority is to reduce process variation and improve handover quality.

Six months later, progress remains inconsistent. The team is busy, workloads feel high and activity levels have increased, yet performance on the priorities that mattered most has changed very little.

When the manager reviews where time and attention have actually been spent, the picture becomes clearer. A significant amount of capacity has been consumed by reactive firefighting, low-priority requests and short-term issues that have continually pulled attention away from the overall objectives of the project. 

Over time, this has created a disconnect between strategy and execution and whilst teams remain active, effort becomes fragmented and progress slows.

Reflecting on this example, are there activities within your organisation currently consuming significant resources without delivering meaningful impact?

How to Use a Project Charter to Define A Project

One of the most effective ways to avoid misaligned effort is to get clarity before the work begins. This is where a Project Charter becomes a powerful tool.

A Project Charter defines the purpose, boundaries and success criteria of a project before resources are committed. It allows a team and its stakeholders to agree on what the project is, what it is not, and what ‘success’ actually looks like.

Without this upfront clarity, teams often find themselves mid-delivery dealing with scope creep, consuming resources that were never accounted for and losing sight of the original objective. A Charter helps prevent this by establishing shared understanding from the outset.

What a Project Charter Typically Covers

A well-constructed Project Charter at a minimum should address:

• Purpose and Problem Statement – Why does this project exist? What specific problem or opportunity is it responding to?
• Objectives and Success Criteria – What does success look like? How will improvement be measured?
• Project Scope – What is included within the boundaries of this project, and what is explicitly excluded?
• Roles and Responsibilities – Who is responsible for delivery, who needs to be consulted, and who has decision-making authority?
• Timeline and Budget – What capacity, budget and timeframe have been allocated?
• Key Risks and Constraints – What assumptions are being made, and what could cause the project to stall or fail?
• Available Resources – What people, systems, data, equipment or support are available to help deliver the project successfully?
• Document Approvals – Who has reviewed and approved the Charter, and who is accountable for ongoing project oversight and sign-off?

When the boundaries of a project are clear, resource allocation decisions become easier and when objectives are specific and measurable, it becomes far harder to justify effort that doesn’t contribute to them.

How to Use the Eisenhower Matrix to Prioritise Team Workload

Once a project is underway, a different challenge emerges. Even when scope is clearly defined, the day-to-day reality of delivery brings a constant stream of demands competing for your team’s attention. This is where the Eisenhower Matrix becomes a valuable tool.

The matrix helps you distinguish between what is genuinely important and what is not by  organising tasks across two dimensions: importance and urgency.

Important and Urgent 

Important and urgent tasks require immediate attention and often relate to critical issues, time-sensitive decisions or operational priorities that genuinely cannot wait. 

In well-managed projects, this area is kept under control through strong planning, clear communication and proactive problem-solving. When organisations consistently reduce the volume of reactive activities, teams are better able to focus their energy on longer-term improvement and strategic priorities.

Important but Not Urgent 

Important but not urgent activities are often the ones that create the greatest long-term value. Capability development, process improvement, planning and relationship-building may not always come with immediate deadlines, but they strengthen operational performance and support more sustainable progress over time.

Organisations that consistently make space for this work are often better positioned to adapt, improve and maintain momentum as priorities evolve.

Urgent but Not Important 

Urgent but not important activities are often the ones that create the greatest distraction from strategic priorities.

These can include unnecessary meetings, avoidable interruptions or requests that feel immediate but contribute little meaningful value. Learning to manage, delegate or reduce this type of activity helps protect time and capacity for the work that has the greatest operational impact.

Not Important and Not Urgent 

Not important and not urgent activities are the tasks that consume time without contributing meaningful value to operational performance or strategic objectives. These can include unnecessary administration, duplicated activity or habits that continue simply because they have always been done that way. While individually they may appear minor, over time they can quietly absorb significant capacity and distract attention from higher-value work. 

Regularly reviewing and reducing this type of activity helps create greater focus, improve efficiency and free up time for work that delivers more meaningful impact.

Overall, the matrix provides a practical way to make patterns in time, attention and resource allocation visible across teams and projects. 

By creating clearer visibility around how much capacity is being absorbed by reactive firefighting, low-value activity or competing priorities, organisations are better able to identify misalignment and refocus effort on the work that will create the greatest operational impact. 

Once this becomes visible, conversations around priorities, resource allocation and operational focus tend to become far more constructive and effective.

Three Questions to Help Refocus Priorities

If resource allocation is something you are navigating in your own team, these questions may be worth reflecting on:

• When you look at where your team’s time and attention went last week, does it match where you would say your highest priorities are?
• What activities in your plan are consistently being deferred and what is consistently displacing them?
• If you mapped your team’s effort against the Eisenhower Matrix, which quadrant would most of it fall into?

Coming Up: Why Resistance to Change Is Usually Misunderstood

Next week we move into one of the most commonly cited challenges in operational leadership, resistance to change. We’ll look at why it happens, why it is often mishandled, and how leaders can work with it rather than around it.

Back to top