Basing
ZBB on cost-cutting is the wrong approach.
Kyle
Hawke | Oct 29, 2018
As
margins tighten in industry after industry, more companies are talking about
zero-based budgeting (ZBB)—the deceptively simple idea that each year’s budget
should start from a zero base, rather than from the prior year’s spending.
The
trouble is that too often, companies see ZBB as just about cost control. In
fact, when done right, ZBB changes a company’s entire culture, instilling a
return-on-investment mentality where people throughout the company think about
value, not just cost.
But to
get there, companies need to shift their focus with ZBB from cost-cutting—which
for most people isn’t a very inspiring goal, especially over time—to helping
people at every level get the best returns they can on what they’re investing
through their budgets.
In
short, ZBB isn’t about pinching pennies. It’s about putting your money where it
matters most.
Keeping
up the Momentum
There’s
little question that many organizations find that their initial push into ZBB
yields significant opportunities for cutting wasteful spend. But what
happens after the first big round of cuts? Too often, it’s like the pre-reunion
crash diet that’s abandoned the minute the “welcome back” cocktails are poured.
In researching 238 companies that announced cost-reduction programs between
2003 and 2014, we found that barely one-quarter were able to sustain the
reductions for four years.
Even
worse, only 41 of the 238 companies, or 17%, were able to grow at the same
time. For the rest, the experience was all pain, with no lasting gain in
return.
What
makes the successful exceptions different? In our work with organizations
across industries, we see a crucial difference in those that sustain ZBB over
time. These companies recognize that the goal of setting budgets to zero every
year isn’t to keep people from spending. It’s to help them see their spending
through a new lens, making choices with complete transparency, rather than
through a fog of last year’s numbers.
With
the right approach, ZBB can make spending intentional. Too often, the first
question people ask in considering a budget is, “Where can you cut?” Under ZBB,
the question becomes, “Why should I spend?”
That’s
the real value that ZBB can unlock, creating an environment in which everyone
starts to “think like an investor”—turning a business-bestseller cliché into a
lived reality. And they can react like an investor as well: new technologies
automate much of the data-gathering and analysis that once required thousands
of spreadsheets to crunch, yielding detailed insights at the touch of a
keystroke.
Flexibility
and Transparency
Importantly,
annual budgets can still allow for agile spending. What previously was an
annual budget line item reading “Brand X—Argentina—promotions” becomes “15
campaigns for Brand X in Argentina at $250,000 each.” If a movie star in Rio
tweets a surprise shout-out hyping Brand X, the regional manager can catch the
moment by reassigning a couple of promotions from Argentina to Brazil.
ZBB
thus breaks bad habits and creates better ones. One industrial-goods maker, for
example, discovered through its ZBB processes that much of its marketing spend
was hidden in other budget lines, many of them pet projects like $10,000
sponsorships for obscure charity-golf tournaments. Pooling these penny-ante
expenses together made it much easier to place bigger, more thoughtful, and
more effective marketing bets.
With
money flowing more quickly to where it can achieve the greatest impact, the
entire enterprise becomes more agile. At that point, the challenge is to keep
momentum going. That’s where the other enablers really matter:
Go
granular. Visibility as to where money is going today must be
available down to the level of individual cost drivers. When planned and actual
spending amounts are shown in detail, managers and leaders can have better
dialogues on the tradeoffs being made. These conversations force a healthy
tension in the organization, and enable the rapid resource allocation that
separates leaders from laggards.
Link
resources to value. Getting money out of a business isn’t much help if you
don’t know where to put it to better use. That’s why growth drivers must also
be understood in detail to uncover what’s really driving value for the business:
Is it new products, emerging markets, M&A? These insights inform where
leaders should reinvest and where they should pull back.
Separate
savings from reinvestment. When savings and reinvestment aren’t
tracked carefully, individual units may hide the savings they generate in
left-pocket-to-right-pocket “reinvestments” that don’t benefit the whole
business. Instead, we recommend separating savings and reinvestment into two
steps by pulling savings into a pool for deliberate reallocation. That helps
ensure resources go where they matter most, and makes it easier to hold
managers accountable for delivering returns on the reinvestments they take on.
If initial investments don’t pay off, subsequent dollars can be clawed back to
the pool for the next big bet.
When
ZBB is only about cost, cutting is all that it can achieve. But when ZBB is
about value and changing mindsets, the resulting faster reinvestment makes it
easier to meet not only existing sales targets, but higher ones as well. Year
after year, the organization can keep feeding growth by putting money where it
matters most.
Kyle
Hawke is a partner in the Washington DC office of global management consulting
firm McKinsey & Co. Søren Fritzen, a
senior partner in McKinsey’s Copenhagen office, and Matt Jochim, a partner in
the London office, also contributed to this article.
https://www.industryweek.com/leadership/zero-based-budgeting-how-do-it-right?ito=792
No comments:
Post a Comment