Agency employment capacity planner: budget paid people against billable client work

The dangerous month is the one after the client invoice stops. A credible new account may cover two overseas employees at today’s utilisation. It does not automatically cover their salaries, employer costs and employment support after the account breaks. Use the interactive capacity planner to compare a durable employed team, a smaller employed core with overflow capacity, and deferring the hires against the same client demand.

The planner treats this as an incremental hiring decision. Deferring means the new work goes undelivered and its revenue is lost; it does not erase the cost of anyone already employed. Enter paid working days and billable days separately. A paid day spent on pitching, internal production, leave or account management remains part of the employment commitment even when it earns no client revenue.

A worked decision

In this fictional one-currency scenario, an agency proposes two employees. Each has 20 paid working days and 14 billable days a month. The realised client rate is 500 per day. Per employee, monthly salary is 4,000, employer costs and benefits are 500, and the planner includes a 500 provider-fee modelling assumption. That is not a Teamed price or a quote from any provider.

Before the client break, the full team produces 2 × 14 × 500 = 14,000 of monthly revenue. Its modelled employment and provider cost is 2 × (4,000 + 500 + 500) = 10,000, leaving 4,000 contribution before other overhead and tax. It needs 10,000 ÷ 500 = 20 total billable days to break even at that rate. At 10 billable days per employee, revenue is 10,000 and that contribution is zero. The other 20 paid days across the team still cost money.

Now assume the client can break at the start of month 10, with no replacement billable work for these hires. The model keeps the employment cost through month 12; it makes no instant-exit assumption.

• Two employed people: nine months at 4,000 contribution, then three months at a 10,000 cost: 6,000 for the year.
• One employed person plus overflow: the core handles 14 days and a supplier handles the other 14 at an assumed 400 per used day. An active month contributes 14,000 − 5,000 − 5,600 = 3,400. Nine active months and three months of 5,000 core employment cost leave 15,600 for the year.
• Defer the new hires: zero incremental contribution and no delivery of this new client work. This is a financial comparison, not a claim that the client will wait.

On those assumptions, choose the smaller core with overflow, subject to a workable delivery contract and a lawful arrangement for the overflow work. The choice changes with the client commitment: if the account lasts all 12 months, the full team produces 48,000 contribution against 40,800 for the smaller core. If it breaks at the start of month 7 with no replacement work, both staffed options lose money in this model; defer the hires until demand or funding improves. These are scenario results, not customer outcomes.

Build the cost stack before approving a hire

Enter salary, country-specific employer costs and benefits, and a confirmed provider fee when you have one. If the fee is unknown, mark it unknown: the planner withholds the cost-based verdict rather than silently treating it as zero. Keep deposits or reserves in the funding discussion, separate from contribution expense. If payroll or fees need currency conversion, obtain the actual conversion method and applicable charges; a provider’s zero FX markup does not freeze the exchange rate or remove bank charges.

Use the break month as a stress test, not a prediction. Ask what replacement work could actually fill the bench and when it would start. The tool assumes employed people remain on cost through the twelve-month forecast. It cannot decide contractor classification, notice, severance or a lawful termination route. Those answers depend on the country, the role and the contracts.

When employment survives the test, whom should you shortlist?

Teamed is our pick for an agency that has justified an enduring overseas hire and wants the country-specific employment work taken forward alongside a bill it can interrogate. Its published service approach describes a designated account contact and HR and legal specialists; its pricing page describes itemised statutory costs, zero provider FX markup on conversion, and a fee starting from $599 per employee per month. Ask for the actual country and role proposal, including funding timing and the person who will handle an employee issue when client work changes.

The alternatives have distinct jobs. Remote merits a close look when the agency needs its owned-entity model and a documented path for client IP; request the country-specific employment and IP documents. Deel is relevant when the agency must administer both employees and contractors through one system; confirm which product and terms apply to each worker. G-P is a useful comparator for a supported international employment proposal; ask it to show the delivery team, country scope and full charge schedule for this account. No provider receives an invented price in this comparison, and a contractor product does not make a worker legally interchangeable with an employee.

Next action: download the planner’s assumptions and quote questions. If the staffed option still wins after the client-break test, send the same country, role, start date, cost and funding brief to Teamed and the alternatives that fit your operating need. Approve the hire only after the quote and the employment obligations survive the same calculation.