Moses (2022) argues that conventional budgeting solutions, such as Zero-Base Bud

Moses
(2022) argues that conventional budgeting solutions, such as Zero-Base
Budgeting and Priority-Driven Budgeting, could be more effective and
sustainable for municipal fiscal management. He claims these alternative
methods could be more complex, time-consuming, and vague to produce
meaningful results. He also criticises the assumption that the price of
government is determined by the citizen’s willingness to pay, which
ignores the value and quality of public services. He suggests that
municipalities need a comprehensive solution that addresses the root
causes of their financial problems, such as unclear missions,
inefficient decision-making, and excessive spending.
In
response to Nikolaos’ question, Kwon and Kang (2018) explain that the
proposed method for estimating the project budget uses a probabilistic
estimation based on the three-point estimation technique and the R-value
determination. These techniques require making assumptions about the
low, most likely, and high values of the cost and impact of each work
package and risk response plan. They also state that the historical data
and experiences of the project managers determine the confidence level
of the budget. Therefore, the accuracy of the budget is influenced by
the quality and validity of these assumptions and data.
Furthermore,
Seneviratne and Martino (2021) discuss the intricate budgeting process
in public universities, influenced by assumptions, practices, and power
relations. The process aligns university agents’ behaviour with
strategic goals, allowing unit communication and coordination. Internal
agents’ dispositions, interests, and power relations influence their
perception, participation, and performance, allowing for negotiation and
improvement. Question
How can public sector organizations balance achieving
strategic goals and meeting stakeholder needs through budgeting?