|
|
Expense Allocation by
|
| Strategic Business Unit | 1995 Actual | 1996 Plan | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Workers Compensation | $ 9,000,000 | $ 8,000,000 |
( 11 %) |
| Commercial Auto Ins | $ 5,000,000 | $ 6,000,000 |
20 % |
| Commercial Property Ins | $ 5,000,000 | $ 4,000,000 |
( 20 %) |
| General Liability Ins | $ 4,000,000 | $ 5,000,000 |
25 % |
| Trucking Insurance | $ 3,000,000 | $ 4,000,000 |
33 % |
| Boiler & Machinery Ins | $ 3,000,000 | $ 2,000,000 |
( 50 %) |
| Ocean Marine Insurance | $ 1,000,000 | $ 1,300,000 |
30 % |
|
Total Expenses: |
$30,000,000 | $30,300,000 |
1 % |
In practice, many corporations establish (simplistic) corporate guidelines which mandate flat budgets or small increases across the corporation. But even horizontal units which 'must live' within such guidelines should recognize that there is ample opportunity to re-allocated people and expenses based on the relative needs of the businesses. If the department must live within a 1% budget increase, it is still possible to dramatically re-allocate resources as shown above. If the corporate mandate is applied across the department, at every level, in order to 'be fair,' the actual result is the elimination of strategic decision making. In essence, the horizontal unit (and the whole company if every department follows suit) commits itself to yesterday's resource-allocation priorities in today's environment.
|
Send e- mail to
webmaster@e-competitors.com with comments. Or
use Feedback.
|