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