| name | allocate-resources |
| description | This skill should be used when the user asks to "review our resource allocation," "are we funding the right things," "build a portfolio allocation view," or needs current spend, headcount, or management attention checked against strategic priority for misallocation.
|
| allowed-tools | Read, Grep, Glob |
| metadata | {"version":"0.3.0","owner":"corporate-strategy practice","review_cadence":"quarterly","work_shape":"option-evaluation","permission_tier":"advisory","output_class":"draft-for-review","sourcing_policy":"volatile-facts-must-be-sourced"} |
Allocate Resources
When to use
For CSO, portfolio managers, or strategy leads diagnosing whether capital, headcount, and management attention match stated strategic priority — not history, politics, or sunk cost.
What this skill does not do
- Does not infer priority from current spend — that's the failure mode being diagnosed.
- Does not invent budget or headcount —
INPUT NEEDED when data missing.
- Does not approve reallocation — recommends specific from→to moves for portfolio forum.
- Does not run growth-vector assessment — cross-checks
assess-growth-vectors if available.
Preconditions
| Input | If missing |
|---|
| Org + corporate-strategy profiles | Surface practice-setup or [PROVISIONAL] |
| Strategic priority ranking | Halt — get or confirm before comparing |
| Allocation data (capital, HC, attention) | Ask; mark partial/missing per row |
Provisional mode
Defaults: generic portfolio units; three priority tiers; [PROVISIONAL] on all figures. User must provide dollars/headcount — never invented.
Trust spine
- Confidence bands (
option-evaluation): High = all options scored against same priority framework, sourced; Medium = criteria explicit, some data partial; Low = priority or spend unknown — structured first pass only.
- Strategic advice vs. support (mandatory): Reallocation table is recommendation input —
[review] on each move; strategist and portfolio committee decide.
- Escalation: Missing priority → stop; inferring priority from spend → forbidden; board-final → GATE + reviewer note.
SOURCING / ASSUMPTIONS / NUMBERS / CONFIDENCE / GATE — per trust-conventions
Workflow
Step 1: Orient
Portfolio scope, allocation types, review forum, time horizon, evidence pack. Read profile definitions for units, tiers, stickiness.
Step 2: Evidence pack
Capital/budget, headcount, management attention, priority ranking — status and source per row. Management attention: [user estimate — not verified] if unsourced. Figures from ~~bi analytics, ~~spreadsheet, or ~~crm connectors must carry [sourced: <connector>, <asset>, <as-of>] on the load-bearing digit.
Step 3: Allocation vs priority comparison
Per unit: priority tier/rank alongside capital %, headcount %, attention. Tag [sourced] or INPUT NEEDED.
Step 4: Pattern detection
| Pattern | Flag when |
|---|
| Legacy overfunding | Low priority, disproportionate share |
| Under-resourced growth bet | Top-tier bet, bottom-quartile spend |
| Under-differentiated allocation | Flat spend despite wide priority spread |
Ask why for legacy overfunding — history is diagnosis, not justification.
Step 5: Growth bets check
Cross-check assess-growth-vectors if run; else flag partial check.
Step 6: Reallocation recommendation
Specific from→to moves with rationale — not vague "rebalance toward growth."
Step 7: Portfolio committee gate
GATE before board/portfolio-committee finals.
Output format
CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
SCOPE: [units]
REVIEW FORUM: [working | portfolio committee | board]
LOAD-BEARING ASSUMPTIONS: [...]
ALLOCATION VIEW:
| Unit | Priority | Capital % | Headcount % | Attention | Flag |
...
UNDER-DIFFERENTIATION CHECK: [...]
GROWTH BETS CHECK: [...]
RECOMMENDED REALLOCATION:
| From | To | Type | Magnitude | Rationale |
...
STICKINESS NOTE: [...]
EVIDENCE GAPS: [...]
Worked example
Input: Unit A priority tier 3 (exit candidate), 28% capital share; Unit B tier 1 adjacent bet, 8% capital.
Excerpt: Unit A flagged legacy overfunding; Unit B under-resourced growth bet. Reallocation: A −10% capital → B +10% [review] — adjacent bet cannot scale at current funding.
Quality checks before delivering
Propose profile update
When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), propose a profile update: show the exact diff against ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/corporate-strategy/CLAUDE.md (org-wide facts go to org-profile.md), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only /corporate-strategy:practice-setup auto-applies a full profile write.
Outputs
Follows plugin CLAUDE.md § Outputs. Branches: supply missing data, portfolio committee memo, exit-or-double-down on legacy units, assess-growth-vectors, or set reallocation trigger date.
