Why Workforce Plans Break Down: Bridging Planning and Execution
- Fiona Tsang
- 2 days ago
- 4 min read
Key insights from Cinareo’s recent conversation with industry experts Mark Alpern and Daniel Piper
This article is the third in a four-part series exploring key themes from Cinareo’s recent conversation with workforce planning experts Mark Alpern and Daniel Piper.
Workforce planning often breaks down not because the work is done poorly, but because the connection between planning and execution is weak or inconsistent.
In the earlier parts of this series, we explored how unreliable data and daily deviations quietly erode performance. But as Mark and Daniel emphasized, those issues are symptoms of something deeper: most teams do not follow a shared system. Decisions are made differently across leaders, channels, and functions. Plans drift, and predictability disappears.
Mark captured it clearly during the discussion: “Workforce planning should be a lifecycle, not a handoff.”
Daniel added that many operations run on personal judgment instead of shared rules. “Everyone is making decisions based on their own mental model,” he said. “There’s no agreed system.”
Bridging this gap begins with alignment and requires a structure that teams can actually follow.
The Missing Middle: Misalignment in Daily Decisions
Organizations often invest heavily in forecasting and capacity planning, yet still struggle because the day-to-day decisions that follow are inconsistent.
Time-off approvals vary by manager.
Channel assumptions shift without notice.
Training timelines do not match hiring realities.
And intraday responses depend on who is on duty.
None of these decisions seems harmful on their own. But together, they create the slow drift that pulls operations away from the plan. Daniel explained it well: “You cannot have predictability when everyone is doing the same thing in different ways.”
This misalignment is not intentional. It happens when teams lack a common frame for how decisions should be made. Without that structure, the plan becomes a suggestion instead of a system.
Why Clear Processes Matter
Mark and Daniel stressed that consistency comes from clear expectations, not from asking teams to “try harder” or use more reports.
This is where standard operating procedures (SOPs) play an important role. SOPs reduce variability. They define how decisions are made, what should happen when conditions change, and which assumptions every team must follow.
Daniel noted that SOPs make the operation more stable: “If you do not standardize the process, you cannot stabilize the outcome.” He was not referring to rigid rules but to shared practices that prevent avoidable surprises.
Mark added that many organizations think better reporting will close the gap, when in reality the issue is fragmentation. SOPs give teams the common language needed to stay aligned even when conditions change.
The point is simple: clear processes do not limit flexibility. They protect predictability.
The WFM Lifecycle Works Only When Teams Are Aligned
Mark’s workforce management lifecycle – gather data, forecast, capacity plan, schedule, intraday, report – is designed to operate as a loop. Each stage should inform the next and rely on the same core assumptions.
In practice, that is where things start to drift. Teams move through each stage with different information, priorities, or interpretations, and the lifecycle stops functioning as one system.
Forecasting uses one definition of volume while scheduling uses another.
Recruitment timelines do not align with capacity expectations.
Reporting reflects numbers no one can tie back to the original plan.
Mark explained that alignment is not achieved through meetings alone: “Teams think they are aligned because they meet once a week. But alignment comes from using the same assumptions, the same definitions, and the same expectations at every stage.”
When each part of the lifecycle follows the same rules and inputs, the plan becomes a system teams can rely on. That is when accuracy turns into consistency, and when planning starts to influence performance instead of chasing it.
How Cinareo Helps Teams Put Structure into Practice
Cinareo reinforces the alignment Mark and Daniel described. It does not replace process; it gives teams a way to follow it consistently.
Every team works from the same assumptions and definitions.
Forecasting, capacity planning, scheduling, and intraday decisions pull from one source of truth.
Changes are visible in real time, so drift is caught early.
Teams can follow the same logic from long-term planning down to daily decisions.
Daniel described Cinareo as “a bloody brilliant product” for operationalizing the standards organizations want but struggle to maintain. It turns alignment into something that can be practiced every day, not discussed once a quarter.
Closing Thoughts
Planning does not fail because people ignore the work. It fails when there is no shared system guiding the decisions that follow it.
Misalignment creates drift.
Shared processes bring predictability.
A consistent lifecycle keeps performance steady.
Mark and Daniel’s message was simple: workforce planning succeeds when the organization operates from the same playbook. Cinareo helps make that possible by providing structure, visibility, and alignment across the entire operation.
More From This Series of Why Workforce Plans Break Down
About Speakers
Mark Alpern
Co Founder/COO
Cinareo
Mark Alpern brings over 30 years of experience in contact center consulting and management. As the co-founder of Cinareo, he developed a transformative SaaS platform for strategic capacity planning and decision-making. Mark has helped organizations optimize workforce management, financial planning, and customer experience through his innovative approaches to digital transformation.
Daniel Piper, CMgr, FCMI
Founder and Independent Consultant
Setekh Solutions
With 15+ years of experience in the BPO, contact center sectors, Dan specializes in transforming operational complexity into clarity and driving measurable business impact. Dan’s expertise spans global operational strategy, continuous improvement, and performance management at the highest levels of corporate leadership.
