Loading
Compare the two utilisation figures. The gap is how much your usual number is understated by ignoring leave.
The denominator is where utilisation goes wrong. Headcount times a standard week ignores leave, holidays and training, which understates utilisation and sets a target nobody can hit. Both figures are shown so the size of that error is visible. Utilisation says how busy you are, not whether the work was worth doing — read it beside margin.
Calculates utilisation both ways — against nominal hours and against hours genuinely available.
Every figure it produces is arithmetic on what you enter, and the working is shown line by line rather than summarised into a single number.
Replace the defaults with your own figures. They are examples chosen to make the shape obvious, not benchmarks — using them unchanged tells you about a company that is not yours.
The lines beneath the headline are the useful part: they show which input is driving the result, which is what makes the answer arguable in a good way.
The denominator is where utilisation goes wrong. Headcount times a standard week ignores leave, holidays and training, which understates utilisation and sets a target nobody can hit. Both figures are shown so the size of that error is visible. Utilisation says how busy you are, not whether the work was worth doing — read it beside margin.
Where two readings of the same question exist, both are shown rather than one being chosen for you. That is deliberate — the difference between them is usually the thing worth discussing.
If a figure looks wrong, change the input you least believe and watch what moves. That is faster than checking the arithmetic.
No. The tool runs in the page, nothing is sent anywhere, and there is no follow-up.
No. They are examples chosen to make the shape clear. Use your own figures.
It is stated in the working shown beneath the result, so you can check it rather than trust it.
Half an hour on your own figures, and an honest answer about the parts Treepie does not improve.