Location strategy
Compare locations on computed total cost and capability availability, not just salary rates.
— Organisation & Workforce
Compares workforce cost across locations, computing total cost, capability availability and structural implications of each option.
2–3 weeks → ~40 minutes
For a full population, not a sample
No coding required
— USE CASES
Compare locations on computed total cost and capability availability, not just salary rates.
Test a location move against what actually moves and what has to stay.
Assess an existing footprint against current cost and capability conditions.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
The figures behind each role are computed by formula during the run, so the arithmetic is identical every time and can be checked line by line.
Figures buried in narrative org data, role documentation and headcount exports are extracted as data you can compute and compare with.
Every role is captured in the same field structure, so records drawn from different documents and sources stay comparable.
Your strategy, standards and prior work are loaded first, so conclusions about the organisation in scope are anchored to your situation.
Current external sources on the organisation in scope are researched during the run rather than recalled from training data, and every source travels with the output.
The same analysis executes per role across the organisation in scope, so coverage is complete rather than indicative.
Workforce cost by location is routine in name only: the inputs are messy, the standard is unwritten, and two people rarely reach the same answer. Location strategy is the typical trigger — compare locations on computed total cost and capability availability, not just salary rates. Done properly it is defensible; done at pace it becomes a judgement call nobody can retrace. And "properly" usually means 2–3 weeks of manual work.
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces computed cost comparison across locations plus capability and structural implications per option. The criteria, ordering and review points that make the answer trustworthy are encoded in the Skill itself — which is the difference between a structured method and a prompt someone pastes in. In effect, 2–3 weeks of senior time compresses into ~40 minutes — and the output is comparable across clients, quarters and colleagues instead of shaped by whoever ran it.
Workforce cost by location exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Redesigns workflows and roles around the practical use of AI, producing a board-ready plan with task-level recommendations, costed capacity gains and clear workforce implications.
Keeps a standing read on the risk universe in scope, working through risk registers, controls and policy documents on a regular cycle to show where each risk stands, what has moved since the last run and which items now need an owner's attention.
Matches available consultant capacity against the work coming down the pipeline each week, showing where people are about to sit idle, where demand will outstrip the skills you have and which pairings genuinely fit.
Runs a recurring skills survey across the workforce on a set cycle, building a living view of skills and utilisation by department that leadership can track month over month.
Ranks candidate locations against weighted workforce and business criteria, tests how cost assumptions affect the result, and produces a board-ready recommendation with a traceable evidence base.
Reviews a workforce metrics pack and states what the measures actually imply, rather than restating the numbers.