My expectation is that the FTE calculation is a comparison of the Resource Availability, as defined by the calendar assigned to the resource, vs. the Availability as defined by the Standard calendar. Basically, if the Standard calendar expects 184 hours in a given month to be worked, and the resources is on a part-time calendar calling for 92 hours in the same given month, then the FTE value for this resource for the given month ought to be 0.50.
I've got a department, where the resources have been constant, all year - no new hires, not leavers. The number of work days and shift hours from the Standard Calendar and US Calendar are shown below. In the third column set, I'm calculating the expected FTEs based on the 5 heads that reside in this department. The Clarity FTEs column contains data read from the Aggregation-Capacity line of the Department\Resources list view, shown below.
Half the FTE numbers produced by Clarity match my expectations. Those that don't, show in red. Note that where the Standard and USA calendars both have 21 days, Clarity is reporting different FTE results 5 FTEs for Mar and Aug, 5.52 FTEs for Jun.
The USA calendar never has more work days or shift hours than the Standard calendar - USA calendar always has same or less. Therefore, how can one get an FTE results higher than 1.0? Why do the Clarity FTEs not match expected results?
Either my expectations are wrong (I'm not using the right equations; does booked overtime inflate historic capacity?), or the capacity slice is in error - would refreshing it make things right?
Taking Chris' favorite line, "Does anyone have any ideas for Dale?"