Capable managers may have to scramble to meet such a “stretch budget” and they may not always succeed. In practice most companies set their budget targets at a “challenging but attainable” level. A challenging but attainable budget may be very difficult to achieve. But it can almost always be met by competent managers exerting reasonable effort
Bonuses based on meeting and exceeding budgets are often a key element of management compensation. Typically, no bonus is paid unless the budget is met. The bonus often increases when the budget target is exceeded, but the bonus is usually capped out at some level. For obvious reasons, managers who have such a bonus plan or whose performance is evaluated based on meeting budget targets usually prefer to be evaluated based on challenging but attainable budgets rather than on stretch budgets. Moreover, challenging but attainable budgets may help build a manager’s confidence and generate greater commitment to the budget. And finally, challenging but attainable budgets may result in less undesirable behavior at the end of budgetary periods by managers who are intent on earning their bonuses. Examples of such undesirable behaviors are presented in several of the In Business boxes in this chapter.
THE DARK SIDE OF TYING BONUSES TO MEETING TARGETS
Although there are some merits behind offering bonuses to managers for meeting targets set in the budget, there may be some negative repercussions from distributing bonuses based on meeting targets. One potential downfall of distributing bonuses only when managers hit their targets is that managers may resort to unethical means to obtain results. For example, in the 1970s, when managers over at Ford needed to hit their sales targets, despite being aware of the fact that the Ford Pinto was not entirely safe for usage, they decided to proceed with mass production to garner more sales revenue. As a result, many drivers of the Ford Pinto were involved in car accidents that resulted in grievous injuries or deaths, causing the company to incur massive legal fees and other costs. Hence, thorough consideration is vital before companies decide to make bonus distribution contingent on meeting certain targets.
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
A standing budget committee is usually responsible for overall policy relating to the budget program and for coordinating the preparation of the budget itself. This committee may consist of the president; vice presidents in charge of various functions such as sales, production, and purchasing; and the controller. Difficulties and disputes relating to the budget are resolved by the budget committee. In addition, the budget committee approves the final budget.
Disputes can (and do) erupt over budget matters. Because budgets allocate resources, the budgeting process determines to a large extent which departments get more resources and which get less. Also, the budget sets the benchmarks used to evaluate managers and their departments. Therefore, it should not be surprising that managers take the budgeting process very seriously and invest considerable energy and emotion in ensuring that their interests, and those of their departments, are protected. Because of this, the budgeting process can easily degenerate into an interoffice brawl in which the ultimate goal of working together toward common goals is forgotten.
Running a successful budgeting program that avoids interoffice battles requires considerable interpersonal skills in addition to purely technical skills. But even the best interpersonal skills will fail if, as discussed earlier, top management uses the budget process to inappropriately pressure employees or to assign blame.