Define outcomes, period and privacy-safe records
Capacity-ledger prerequisites
- One lead cohort and observation period with a stable intake definition. (not complete)
- Documented aggregate outcomes such as uncontactable, ineligible, qualified, proposal and converted. (not complete)
- Handling-time estimates or observations for review, contact, discovery, proposal and cleanup. (not complete)
- A loaded productive-hour cost with named pay, employer-cost, enablement and overhead inclusions. (not complete)
- One proposed qualification checkpoint, its operating cost and expected false-rejection risk. (not complete)
- A declared feasible use, if released hours are to be valued as contribution rather than capacity only. (not complete)
Calculate handling capacity without inventing revenue
handling capacity cost = leads handled × handling hours per lead × loaded productive-hour cost
- leads handled
- Aggregate leads receiving the defined handling stage in the selected period (leads per period) — privacy-safe business record
- handling hours per lead
- Average or scenario time for the named review/contact stages (hours per lead) — time observation or user scenario
- loaded productive-hour cost
- Declared labour-cost boundary divided by productive hours (CU per productive hour) — business record or labour recovery tool output
Scenario capacity value from an avoided lead = avoided handling hours × loaded productive-hour cost. Call it contribution only when a feasible replacement use and its contribution are separately evidenced.
- Freeze the cohort, period and outcome definitions.
- Map the handling stages that each outcome actually consumes.
- Estimate or observe time using aggregate records and preserve uncertainty.
- Apply one loaded productive-hour cost without double counting overhead.
- Calculate the current handling-capacity baseline.
- Model one qualification checkpoint, its cost and the leads it may avoid or reject.
- Test lower, base and higher avoided-lead cases plus a false-rejection case.
- Review conversion and customer contribution separately in the lead-value tool.
Worked example: a reversible qualification checkpoint
Invented tax-excluded scenario: 80 leads, 0.75 handling hours per lead, 40 CU loaded productive-hour cost, and a proposed checkpoint costing 300 CU for the period.
| Line | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Handling hours | 80 leads × 0.75 hours | 60 hours |
| Handling capacity cost | 60 hours × 40 CU | 2,400 CU |
| Avoided leads | Hours released | Capacity value | Checkpoint cost | Net scenario capacity value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 7.5 | 300 | (300) | 0 |
| 20 | 15.0 | 600 | (300) | 300 |
| 30 | 22.5 | 900 | (300) | 600 |
Turn released hours into an honest next decision
| Evidence state | Allowed interpretation | Do not claim |
|---|---|---|
| No feasible replacement use | Released capacity | Cash saving or revenue |
| Avoided paid hours or contractor invoice | Potential cash saving, subject to actual reduction | Saving before cost changes |
| Feasible additional work with bounded contribution | Scenario contribution capacity | Guaranteed demand or revenue |
- Using cost per lead while omitting handling time.
- Treating all non-converting leads as low quality.
- Changing qualification and campaign targeting at the same time, then claiming causation.
- Valuing released time as revenue without available demand and delivery capacity.
- Using one loaded-hour cost while also adding the same labour overhead separately.
- Ranking individuals or using protected traits instead of aggregate operational outcomes.
- Copying a qualification score, close rate or cost-per-qualified-lead benchmark.
Lead-capacity questions
- Is every non-converting lead low quality?
- No. Timing, follow-up, offer fit, capacity and measurement can affect conversion. Use documented outcome reasons and avoid retroactive labels.
- Are released hours a cash saving?
- Only when paid hours or another cash cost actually falls. Otherwise the result is released capacity that still needs a feasible use.
- Should Margin101 set a qualification score?
- No. Qualification criteria are business- and jurisdiction-specific and can create exclusion risk. This article measures aggregate capacity economics, not individual eligibility.
- Where should lead contribution be tested?
- Use the Lead Value tool with an explicit close-rate scenario and bounded customer contribution. Keep that uncertainty separate from the handling-time ledger.
Sources and methodology
- Lead Value methodology — Margin101: Product-owned close-rate, bounded contribution and cost-per-lead ceiling mechanics.
- Billable Utilisation methodology — Margin101: Product-owned productive-capacity denominator and no-benchmark boundary.
- About qualified leads and converted leads — Google Ads Help: Provider outcome semantics only; no score, close rate or customer value is imported.
Test lead value, acquisition cost and capacity
- Lead Value Calculator
Estimate contribution-based lead value and a sustainable cost-per-lead ceiling
- Customer Acquisition Cost Planner
Measure loaded and marginal customer acquisition cost across aligned channels
- Billable Utilisation Planner
Turn available time into realistic billable capacity