With a budgeting process that takes several weeks, sometimes months, the final version of the budget can be missing important information that came up during the process: a new client signed, the leave of a key employee, a pandemic…
There is no short answer to this question. However, the budget remains an essential tool to keep everyone aligned with the company’s strategy, and its short-term and long-term objectives. In most cases, it is also a mandatory process for reporting purposes to auditors and financial institutions.
The budget process remains a conservative process, looking toward the present by analyzing the past. It can help answer questions such as “Why is the margin lower than expected?”
One of the major drawbacks of this process is the lack of visibility toward the future. It does not support our interrogations on:
To bridge this gap, high management usually comes up with a “strategic plan,” with short term and long-term indicators to clarify where the company is heading.
To align the budgeting process with the strategic plan, Kaplan and Norton (2006) suggest using key performance indicators (KPIs) in a balanced scorecard model with four perspectives: Finance, Customers, Internal Process, Innovation and Learning.
Financial | What are our shareholders’ expectations for financial performance? |
Customer | To reach our financial objectives, how do we create value for our customers? |
Internal Process | What processes must we excel at to satisfy our customers and shareholders? |
Learning and Growth | How do we align our intangible assets—people, systems, and culture—to improve the critical processes? |
Breaking down the performance of the company into these four different perspectives while understanding the interdependencies between them helps high management to have an overall understanding of the challenges the company is facing. Also, it generates more attention and alignment from the divisions.
Aligning organizational units to create value at the enterprise level generally gets less attention than creating value at the business unit (BU) level.1
We often see corporate headquarters detached from the BUs realities as the headquarters does not deal with customers, nor does it run processes to make products or services.
As a matter of fact, one of the headquarters' main objectives is to align the BUs in their value-creating activities, and help each one of them achieve its own objectives.
Nonetheless, nowadays data is collected every day in the different systems and databases of the company; thus, an interesting approach would be to do the inventory of the data already available and see how it can feed the company’s balanced scorecard.
With the evolution of technology and the need to be able to process more and more data, the company will eventually be forced to implement a new EPM2 solution to facilitate the budgeting process. During this project, management will generally gather a group of analysts and managers already accustomed to the company’s reporting process to drive the project.
We often notice a misalignment among the members of this group on how to manage the project and the expected outcome. This is a symptom of a communication gap with high management regarding the company’s priorities and its strategic plan.
Before diving into the implementation of a new EPM, it would be interesting for high management to work with its BUs to discuss its KPIs and the priorities of each stakeholder. And by doing so, not only will the balanced scorecard arise from the project naturally, but it will also be a great initiative to align the BUs with the company’s strategic plan. Contact us to learn more!
Sources
https://www.oracle.com/ca-en/performance-management/what-is-epm/