Rosebank Workspace Business Plan — Key Performance Indicators and Management Dashboard
The occupancy, revenue per desk, churn and contribution indicators reported monthly, with targets.
Section 24 of 29
Key Performance Indicators and Management Dashboard
Jump to section
- i. Important Notice and Basis of Preparation
- 1. Executive Summary
- 2. Investment Thesis
- 3. Company and Business Overview
- 4. Problem, Customer Need and Value Proposition
- 5. Products and Services
- 6. Industry Analysis
- 7. Market Analysis and Sizing
- 8. Customer Analysis
- 9. Competitive Landscape
- 10. Business Model
- 11. Go-to-Market Strategy
- 12. Operating Model
- 13. Management and Organisation
- 14. Strategic Plan, FY2027 to FY2031
- 15. SWOT Analysis and Strategic Implications
- 16. Risk Analysis and Mitigation
- 17. ESG and Sustainability
- 18. Implementation Roadmap
- 19. Financial Model and Assumptions
- 20. Projected Financial Statements
- 21. Funding Requirement, Structure and Investment Returns
- 22. Sensitivity and Scenario Analysis
- 23. Key Performance Indicators and Management Dashboard
- 24. Conclusion and Recommendation
- A. Appendix A: Detailed Financial Statements
- B. Appendix B: FY2027 Monthly Operating and Cash Profile
- C. Appendix C: Assumption Register
- D. Appendix D: Glossary and Definitions
Twelve metrics, four of which are leading indicators reported weekly. Occupancy is measured before revenue because it predicts it.
23.1 Financial and operating KPIs
Table 73 Key performance indicators, FY2027 to FY2031
|
KPI |
2027 |
2028 |
2029 |
2030 |
2031 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Revenue growth |
– |
271% |
52% |
31% |
19% |
|
Centre contribution margin |
-19.8% |
19.3% |
33.4% |
27.6% |
33.9% |
|
EBITDA margin |
-84.9% |
-5.7% |
14.7% |
10.3% |
19.3% |
|
Net margin |
-123.8% |
-21.8% |
3.9% |
1.1% |
12.0% |
|
Blended occupancy (average) |
42.0% |
67.3% |
83.1% |
74.2% |
84.2% |
|
Occupancy at year end |
64.0% |
75.0% |
84.2% |
82.9% |
84.2% |
|
Desk capacity |
289 |
533 |
533 |
755 |
755 |
|
Occupied desks (average) |
185 |
400 |
449 |
626 |
636 |
|
Revenue per occupied desk per month |
R7,665 |
R8,256 |
R8,879 |
R9,172 |
R9,622 |
|
Rent as a percentage of revenue |
62.1% |
44.0% |
37.1% |
39.4% |
36.3% |
|
Staff cost as a percentage of revenue |
55.3% |
25.5% |
20.6% |
19.9% |
17.7% |
|
Return on invested capital |
-56.4% |
-19.4% |
10.9% |
8.2% |
48.4% |
|
Return on equity |
-107.6% |
-57.1% |
13.5% |
4.8% |
38.0% |
|
Debt service cover |
n.m. |
n.m. |
1.32× |
1.18× |
2.80× |
|
Net debt / EBITDA |
n.m. |
n.m. |
0.73× |
-0.35× |
-1.10× |
|
Cash conversion cycle (days) |
(27) |
(41) |
(43) |
(46) |
(44) |
23.2 Management dashboard
Table 74 Management dashboard — targets, frequency and accountability
|
Metric |
Target |
Frequency |
Owner |
Why it is on the dashboard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Occupancy by centre |
Ramp plan +0pp; 87% at stabilisation |
Weekly |
Centre manager |
The dominant value driver; a one-month slip compounds through the ramp |
|
Net new desks contracted |
19 / 16 / 15 per month during ramp |
Weekly |
Business development manager |
The leading indicator of occupancy four to eight weeks ahead |
|
Qualified pipeline value |
3.0× the next quarter’s desk target |
Weekly |
Business development manager |
The leading indicator of net new desks |
|
Notices received |
< 2.1% of desks per month |
Weekly |
Centre manager |
Churn arrives as notices; a spike precedes an occupancy fall by 60 to 90 days |
|
Achieved rate versus card |
≥ 95% of published rate |
Monthly |
Managing director |
Distinguishes occupancy won on merit from occupancy bought with discount |
|
Centre contribution |
Budget |
Monthly |
Centre manager |
Site-level accountability separate from group overhead |
|
Rent cover by centre |
≥ 2.2× at stabilisation |
Monthly |
Managing director |
The clearest single test of whether a lease was well negotiated |
|
EBITDA versus budget |
Budget |
Monthly |
Managing director |
Board and covenant reporting |
|
Closing cash and 13-week forecast |
≥ R3.0m at all times |
Weekly |
Finance manager |
The plan’s binding operational constraint during the ramp |
|
Debt service cover (rolling 12 months) |
≥ 1.30× managed, 1.15× covenant |
Monthly |
Finance manager |
Managed above covenant so a miss is visible two quarters early |
|
Member concentration |
≤ 8% of a centre’s desks |
Monthly |
Centre manager |
The cap is only effective if it is measured |
|
Member satisfaction and renewal rate |
Renewal ≥ 75%; satisfaction ≥ 8.0 / 10 |
Quarterly |
Operations director |
Retention is a third of the commercial workload and cheaper than acquisition |
The first four metrics are leading indicators and are reported weekly at the commercial meeting. This is deliberate: by the time monthly EBITDA shows a problem, the pipeline that caused it is two months old and cannot be recovered. The Company manages debt service cover to an internal floor of 1.30× against a covenant of 1.15× for the same reason, the gap is the warning period.