Well done, Henry! As a park superintendent I got to do ZBB for a
few years and, as you say, the theoretical approach doesn't get to the
reality stage. I did like the "nothing's sacred" element, which required
everything to be put on the table to be considered for dropping or
augmenting. That gave the opportunity to axe a few things that had
outlived their usefulness but never surfaced to a level of visibility in
other systems. Of course, what WAS sacred was staff, and so all we
were doing was substituting 'in' things for 'out' things so as not to
cut
staff (at which point I will plead that there never was ENOUGH staff
to begin with).

In my experience with budgeting in Federal agencies, WHICH budget
system you use is less important than HOW you apply that system. If
the budget is prepared by the top manager, sitting in splendid
isolation,
and then handed to you as what you will live with, it doesn't much
matter
if it's ZBB or XYZ you're doing...and I did see some managers handle ZBB
that way. Staff provided the data, but all the judgment calls were done
in
secret.

Nothing new under the sun, is there?
--
Tom Vaughan    "The Waggin' Tongue"
<[log in to unmask]>   (970) 533-1215
11795 Road 39.2, Mancos, CO 81328  USA
Cultural Resource Management, Interpretation, Planning, & Training