Insufficient connection time
Poor schedule planning and connection time policies
FA-07
Static Resource Allocation
Systemic Anatomy
Systemic Description
Staffing levels, inventory, and physical capacity are determined by historical averages or fixed annual budgets, failing to flex in response to real-time demand volatility or predictable peaks.
Root Cause Type
Planning-Execution Disconnect
Why It Recurs
Financial planning requires fixed budgets committed months in advance; predictive analytics exist but are not integrated into operational execution systems.
Governance Failure
Organizational separation between Finance (planning/budgeting) and Operations (execution); contractual rigidity in labor agreements and vendor schedules.
Scope Boundary
Does not explain individual staff competence, behavior, or equipment failures. Only explains friction arising from resource quantity/timing misalignment with demand.
Structural Risk Profile
Decision Frequency
high
How often decisions of this type are made in the affected context.
Blast Radius
localized
The scope and scale of impact when this friction manifests.
Reversibility
easy
The ease with which decisions affected by this friction can be undone.
Time to Impact
immediate
The delay between decision and observable consequence.
Decision Fallout
Typical Decisions
- Staffing to average demand rather than peak demand to minimize labor costs
- Locking vendor schedules months ahead without flex provisions for demand changes
Delayed Effects
- Severe service bottlenecks during predictable peak periods
- Staff burnout and turnover due to chronic under-resourcing
Early Warning Signals
- Consistently long wait times during specific times of day or days of week
- Physical spaces chronically overcrowded despite demand patterns being known
Manifestations
Confusion about baggage recheck requirements
Insufficient staff at connection points
Inability to self-service rebooking
Insufficient authority delegation to frontline staff
Resolution Boundary
Decision Level
cross-functional
This friction requires cross-functional resolution because it involves bridging the organizational separation between Finance departments that control budgets and Operations departments that manage execution. Neither function can unilaterally resolve the disconnect; the change requires joint governance mechanisms that integrate financial planning and operational reality.
This friction cannot be resolved locally.
Type of Change Required
Flex Capacity Contracting
- Static resource allocation continues when labor agreements and vendor contracts lock in fixed capacity months in advance. The friction persists until contracting structures incorporate variable capacity provisions that enable adjustment in response to actual demand patterns.
Planning-Execution Integration
- This friction persists because financial planning and operational execution occur in separate organizational cycles with minimal integration. The required change involves structurally connecting demand forecasting systems to resource allocation authority so that operational insights directly inform resourcing decisions.
Real-Time Resource Reallocation Authority
- Bottlenecks during predictable peaks occur when operational management lacks authority to shift resources dynamically. The change required involves delegating resource deployment decisions to operational levels with appropriate financial guardrails rather than requiring finance approval.
What Does Not Work
- Enhancing prediction accuracy fails when resource allocation decisions remain locked to historical budgets. Better forecasts do not translate to dynamic resourcing if the planning-to-execution pathway remains rigid and infrequent.
- Creating mechanisms to add temporary capacity during peaks fails because it treats a structural problem as an operational one. Overtime is costly and unsustainable, addressing symptoms of misalignment rather than resolving the planning disconnect.
- Shifting existing staff to bottleneck areas fails when the root issue is absolute capacity rather than distribution. Redeployment cannot create capacity that was never allocated, and merely redistributes inadequacy across service points.
AERIM
AERIM is the operating system designed to resolve the structural conditions described above. It addresses the governance, coordination, and decision architecture failures that the Friction Atlas documents. AERIM operates at the resolution boundary where local fixes fail and systemic change is required.