# Resource Allocation Under Constraints Small teams allocate a finite budget across competing fictional initiatives, then rebalance their portfolio when an unexpected mid-cycle cut removes resources. **Time:** 25 minutes. UWT suggested duration based on a 25-minute allocation and cut cycle. **People:** 4 to 24. Teams of 3 to 5 people working in parallel, with 1 person choosing a scribe role. ## Choose this exercise **Purpose:** Surface competing priorities, hidden assumptions, and trade-off criteria when funding changes unexpectedly. **Use it when:** Use during project kickoffs, planning cycles, or quarterly retrospectives when teams must clarify decision criteria before making actual capital or time commitments. **Skip it when:** Skip when the team has no real-world budget or priority decisions to make, or during high-stakes organizational restructuring with active job cuts. ## Materials and tools - 1 printed Scenario and Allocation Worksheet per team of 3 to 5 - 1 pen or pencil per team - 10 physical counters (tokens, chips, or coins) per team (optional, scratch paper numbers work) - 1 digital countdown timer visible to the room ## Before participants arrive 1. Place one printed worksheet and pen at each team table. 2. If using tokens, place a bag of 10 counters at each station. 3. Pre-assign or let participants form teams of 3 to 5 people. ## Say this to open In this activity, your team has 10 budget units to invest across three competing strategic initiatives. You will decide how to divide those units, name your expected benefit, and write down your main assumption. Halfway through, external conditions will shift and force a trade-off. Choose a scribe to capture your decisions on your worksheet. ## How to run it ### 1. Set initial allocation (6 minutes) Teams read the three initiatives on the worksheet. Working together, teams distribute all 10 budget units across the options. Scribes record the number of units, the expected payoff, and the primary assumption behind each investment. Teams must allocate all 10 units before the timer expires. ### 2. Apply mid-cycle cut (6 minutes) Facilitator announces: 'Your total budget has been cut immediately from 10 units down to 7 units. You must remove exactly 3 units from your current portfolio.' Teams renegotiate their allocations, adjust the worksheet, and write down exactly what work stops or slows down because of the cut. ### 3. Exchange and stress-test plans (7 minutes) Pair teams to swap worksheets. If an odd number of teams exists, form one triad where Team A reviews Team B, Team B reviews Team C, and Team C reviews Team A. If only one team exists (in a 4-person group), the facilitator reviews their worksheet. Teams spend 3 minutes silently reviewing their partner team's 7-unit allocation. Then, each team takes 2 minutes to point out one underlying assumption that, if false, would force the plan to fail or change. ### 4. Whole-room debrief (6 minutes) Gather the full room. Call on two or three teams to share the hardest cut they made and the assumption their partner team flagged. Synthesize similarities in decision criteria across the room. ## Debrief questions - Which initiative was the easiest to cut, and what criteria made that decision clear? - What implicit assumption did your partner team spot that your own team had overlooked? - How can you apply this trade-off rule when real priorities conflict this quarter? **Finished output:** A completed allocation worksheet showing initial and revised budgets, trade-offs made, and flagged assumptions. ## Remote Run in video breakout rooms of 3 to 5 people. Provide each team an editable shared document or slide containing the scenario table. Broadcast the mid-cycle cut announcement via chat or room broadcast at minute 6. Use shared document links for the team exchange in step 3. ## Hybrid Keep in-person attendees in in-person table teams and remote participants in online breakout rooms. All teams use a shared digital worksheet template so cross-team review in step 3 works across both formats. ## Access and participation choices - Participants may choose spoken advocacy, written note-taking, or quiet reviewing without mandatory public speaking. - Any participant may opt out of whole-room reporting by delegating the share to a teammate. ## If the session gets stuck **A team deadlocks on how to split the initial 10 units during step 1.** Remind them that perfect consensus is not required; they can test an aggressive split now because the cut in step 2 will challenge their logic anyway. **A team tries to cut by taking exactly one unit evenly from each initiative without making a real choice.** Prompt them: 'If you shave a third off everything, which initiative actually stops delivering? Choose at least one initiative to protect fully.' ## Terms used here - Budget Unit: An arbitrary measure representing a fixed block of money, staff time, or organizational capacity. ## Participant material: Scenario and Allocation Worksheet TEAM NAME: ____________________ SCENARIO: Your organization has 10 budget units to allocate across three competing corporate priorities for the upcoming fiscal year. You cannot save units. INITIATIVE A: Core Maintenance & Service Improve uptime, update legacy systems, and resolve customer service tickets. INITIATIVE B: Market Exploration Conduct discovery interviews and prototype an unproven service for an emerging audience. INITIATIVE C: Resilience & Risk Mitigation Build backup infrastructure, run compliance training, and prepare for potential supply or regulatory disruption. ------------------------------------------------------------ ROUND 1: 10-UNIT ALLOCATION - Initiative A Units: [ ] | Payoff: _________________________ | Key Assumption: _________________________ - Initiative B Units: [ ] | Payoff: _________________________ | Key Assumption: _________________________ - Initiative C Units: [ ] | Payoff: _________________________ | Key Assumption: _________________________ Total Units Allocated (Must equal 10): [ ] ------------------------------------------------------------ ROUND 2: 7-UNIT REVISED ALLOCATION (AFTER 3-UNIT CUT) - Initiative A Revised Units: [ ] - Initiative B Revised Units: [ ] - Initiative C Revised Units: [ ] Total Revised Units (Must equal 7): [ ] What specific capability, milestone, or task was stopped or delayed by this cut? _________________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------ PEER REVIEW NOTE (Completed by Partner Team): What unstated assumption could break this revised plan? _________________________________________________________________________________ ## Sources and adaptation Observed in TeamBuilding.com listicle '20 Effective Strategy Games For Teams' by Angela Robinson. Adapted by United We Transform into a standalone resource-allocation decision exercise. The source document (TeamBuilding.com article by Angela Robinson) is a broad listicle mentioning multiple parlor and commercial board games. UWT's archived run sheet structured a specific simulation ('Strategy Games for Teams: Practice Decisions Under Constraints') based on resource allocation trade-offs. This specification formalizes that concrete 10-to-7 unit allocation mechanic into a structured 25-minute simulation with a clear printable worksheet, timing, peer stress-testing with support for odd team counts, and debrief prompts. [TeamBuilding.com](https://teambuilding.com/en/articles/strategy-games-for-teams) Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/20-effective-strategy-games-for-teams/