Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Issue Resolution With Planning & Budgeting Process

778 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Issue Resolution With Planning & Budgeting Process

  1. 1. Issue resolution with Planning & Budgeting Framework<br />
  2. 2. MCKINSEY IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS WITH PLAN & BUDGET PROCESS<br /><ul><li>Historical lack of clear link of plans and targets to strategy
  3. 3. Targets not always underpinned by transparent, robust assumptions
  4. 4. Limited capability in planning/ business case development
  5. 5. Lack of clear plans and targets in some areas
  6. 6. Historical lack of clear strategic direction-setting/ prioritisation in some areas
  7. 7. Examples of disconnects:
  8. 8. 5-year Fundraising strategy identified Legacies and DM as key income streams for investment, but without a clear planning link, the 2007 budget for this investment was slashed by £0.8m
  9. 9. In 2006, UKO ICS under-spent the charitable spend budget by £6m partly due to the absence of an Operating Plan underpinning the budget, and there was no onward link to performance management
  10. 10. Strategy
  11. 11. Planning and targeting
  12. 12. Perfor-mance manage-ment
  13. 13. Budgeting
  14. 14. Targets not always well-understood/ communicated or clearly cascaded
  15. 15. Lack of clear individual accountability for targets
  16. 16. Historically a lack of SMART objectives against which to manage performance
  17. 17. Staff including directors and managers not always held to account for performance against budgets/targets
  18. 18. Budgets not always underpinned by rigorous plans and targets </li></ul> Source: Interviews; Staff Survey<br />
  19. 19. Translate the Strategy<br /><ul><li>Define corporate priorities and themes
  20. 20. Select measures and targets
  21. 21. Select strategic initiatives defining;
  22. 22. directorate roles & responsibilities
  23. 23. milestones
  24. 24. strategic budget for initiative
  25. 25. (use of strategy map &</li></ul>balanced scorecard)<br /><ul><li>Link fundraising</li></ul>strategy, fusion,<br />force for change<br />requirements<br />to corporate<br />priorities<br /><ul><li>Note this does</li></ul>ask for <br />directorate<br />objectives but<br />confirms their<br />role in achieving<br />corporate priorities <br />Develop the strategy/ Test & adapt<br /><ul><li>Environment scanning incl. PESTLE
  26. 26. Leading to evidence based corporate</li></ul>priorities<br /><ul><li>Directorate’s involved in this</li></ul>process highlighting trends<br />and subsequent resource<br />requirements via <br />Proforma business<br /> cases<br /><ul><li>This approach will</li></ul>mean new or<br />‘tweaking’<br />of corporate<br />priorities<br />is no longer<br />disconnected<br />from the<br />‘front line’<br />Develop the<br />strategy/<br />Test & adapt<br />Translate<br />the<br />Strategy<br />Macmillan<br />3 Year<br />Strategy<br /><ul><li>Improve key processes</li></ul>which deliver corporate<br />priorities and<br />sub strategies<br /><ul><li>Develop operating plan
  27. 27. Plan resource capacity
  28. 28. Prepare budgets
  29. 29. Business cases</li></ul>Plan Operations<br /><ul><li>PM by way of</li></ul>dashboards,<br />or balanced<br />scorecards<br /><ul><li>‘Performance board’</li></ul>to increase<br />accountability, track <br />benefits in approved <br />business cases<br /><ul><li>Track benefits of sub-</li></ul>strategies<br /><ul><li>Performance used as a forum</li></ul>for discussion and continuous improvement<br />Performance & Governance Framework<br />Performance<br />& Governance<br />Framework<br />Plan<br />Operations<br />
  30. 30. <ul><li>Potential conflict if directorate’s conduct HS after corporate priorities are set;
  31. 31. may identify a service need which ends up being retro-fitted to the corporate priorities
  32. 32. lessens credibility of the corporate planning process and the corporate priorities
  33. 33. To ensure credible corporate alignment
  34. 34. balance of BAU and new areas of focus
  35. 35. this allows stretch targets for BAU
  36. 36. BAU assessed against corporate priorities ensuring its fit to Macmillan’s mission</li></ul>Section: strategy<br /><ul><li>Advantage of Horizon scanning (HS) taking place before EMT set corporate priorities:
  37. 37. internally; the directorate’s will feed their HS results into this process
  38. 38. externally; surveys etc to provide greater scope for strategic direction to be set by those affected by cancer
  39. 39. PESTLE
  40. 40. This will feed into a CSA paper to EMT recommending a number of options such as;
  41. 41. a new corporate priority
  42. 42. a change in focus for an existing priority
  43. 43. provide high level resource implications for each of the options
  44. 44. evidence based priority setting</li></li></ul><li>Section: planning & targeting<br /><ul><li>Directorate objectives which do not fit with corporate objectives can lead to directorates being pulled in two different directions and facing competing demands
  45. 45. The proposed revision to the HS process and CSA will provide the benchmark;
  46. 46. to challenge existing activities and
  47. 47. test objectives against the corporate mission
  48. 48. This way resources are effectively tested against the mission priorities and legacy services which are no longer a key focus can be reallocated</li></li></ul><li>Section: performance management<br /><ul><li>Introduction of a performance panel/board with sufficient authority to challenge and review progress against targets
  49. 49. Corporate and Directorate objectives should cascade to Individual performance assessments
  50. 50. Reward scheme around delivery of corporate priorities
  51. 51. RAPID model – decision making model to free ‘bottlenecks’ and enable increased accountability and effective decision making</li></li></ul><li>

×