Search

Consultants are hired to please a manager, a group of managers, or an organization. They are not hired to please themselves, to worry about whether they should have been hired for different reasons, or to muse over better uses of organizational resources. Those questions are settled by payment of a fee, assuming that the product was satisfactory. However, in the case of zero base budgeting in DeKalb, there is an opportunity to put in writing just how the consultant's views of the process match the expectations and evaluations of the organization. Although this is often the hardest part of the consultantship process to perform, it was rather simple in this case. Zero base budgeting was a specific technique, and the manager was familiar enough to know how it worked generally and to assess the process. In reality, the consultant became a relatively highly paid short-term addition to the city's work force for a narrow technique. Payment was a simple lump sum based on the consultant's estimated hours. Extra hours (there were some) were not reimbursed.

In theory, zero based budgeting calls for total cost analysis of all programs every year. Each item of expenditure is to be scrutinized to see if it can be reduced or eliminated. In practice, zero basing is expensive and time consuming. A good manager uses it when he expects the gains will outweigh the costs. Few managers would deny that analyzing and defending the entire budget is a useful tool in selected circumstances. Incremental analysis of budgets begins with the assumption that three-fourths of the federal government's expenditures are on non-controllable items such as interest on the public debt and commitments to individuals for social security, medical care, pensions, and the like. An effective incremental budget, then, displays certain basic data, like, it establishes what the "base" has been in both dollars and personnel and what level of activity or service, in output terms which are appropriate to the activity, that base has provided. Secondly, it identifies proposed changes from the base in continuing programs and defends each change explicitly. Moreover, it identifies significant go or no-go decisions which must be made, particularly project starts or new programs and the termination of programs or projects.

Comments on the article 'Zero-Base Budgeting: A Critical Analysis,' published in the 'Southern Review of Public Administration' journal. Lowering of zero-base budgeting (ZBB) expectations; Experience of the state of Kentucky with ZBB.

Focuses on the zero-base budgeting and evaluation of rehabilitation programs in the United States. Advantages of program evaluation; Description of the competition on human service programs; History of the budgeting system.

Discusses findings of a post-meeting survey of participants in a zero-base budgeting (ZBB) seminar sponsored by the Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co. Importance of planning and budgeting functions; Percentage of respondents who believed that their planning and budgeting systems meet the needs of most management levels; Percentage of respondents who are considering the implementation of a revised budgeting system using the ZBB approach or elements of it.

Suggests conditions for companies with plans of integrating zero-base budgeting (ZBB) with management by objectives (MBO). Importance of meaningful planning system; Previous existence of either ZBB or MBO within the company before the integration; Training of staff for the implementation of ZBB and MBO.

The article presents information about U.S. President Jimmy Carter's reorganization of the federal government in the U.S. Carter hammered hard at the need for reorganization. Coupled as it was with a promise to institute more effective management practices in the federal government, it is likely that the reorganization theme appealed to many voters. It may well have been one of the factors that led to his election. Reorganization on a major scale is never an easy task. Carter's reorganization efforts, if they are to be successful, will take at least one full term of office. Nonetheless, it is now possible-over two years since his election-to offer a reorganization progress report and an appraisal of the quality of the reorganization efforts that have been made to date. The Carter reorganization effort has three major elements. Stated simply, these elements are, agency reorganization, conversion of federal executive budgeting to a zero base format and civil service reform. Despite the fact that the President tends to view all of these elements as parts of a comprehensive reorganization package, each of them deserves separate consideration. During his election campaign, Carter often described a maze of government agencies, frequently with overlapping jurisdictions, that needed to be reorganized to make the government more effective and more responsive to needs of its citizens.

The article discusses a previously published article "Congress and Executive Branch Budget Reform: The House Appropriations Committee and Zero-Base Budgeting," by Frank D. Draper and Bernard T. Pitsvada, published in vol. 2, of the issue of International Journal of Public Administration. The period involved is 1977-1978, when the agencies formulate and considered the fiscal year 1979 budget, and represents the first use of the new Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB) technique. Frank D. Draper and Bernard T. Pitsvada detailed the extent of the committee's interest in ZBB by interviewing committee staff members and reviewing the hearings, reports, and records of floor action on all fiscal year 1979 appropriation bills.

The article presents information about the book "Zero-Base Budgeting: A Planning, Resource Allocation and Control Tool," by James W. Pattillo. The book is about a budgeting technique recently popularized by a former Governor of Georgia. Since it is an evolving technique, the study reflects knowledge and experience about it at what could be an early stage of development. The book is developed largely around identifying "decision units" and developing "decision packages." A decision package describes an incremental level of effort performed to meet the objectives of a decision unit.