Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB)

Posted on by user

Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB)

Zero-based budgeting (ZBB) is a budgeting approach that requires every expense to be justified from a “zero base” for each new period. Instead of carrying forward prior budgets and applying incremental increases, ZBB builds the budget around current needs and strategic priorities.

Key takeaways

  • Every expense must be justified each budgeting cycle.
  • ZBB can reduce unnecessary costs by avoiding automatic budget increases.
  • It provides detailed insight into cost drivers but is time- and resource-intensive.
  • ZBB can bias funding toward activities with clear short-term returns and may underfund long-term projects like R&D.
  • Organizations and individuals can use ZBB to align spending with goals and improve financial discipline.

Origins and purpose

ZBB was developed in the late 1960s by Peter Pyhrr at Texas Instruments. Its main purpose is to force decision-makers to evaluate the necessity and effectiveness of all expenditures, ensuring resources are allocated to activities that support current strategic objectives.

How ZBB works (overview)

  1. Define the budgeting period and objectives.
  2. Break the organization into decision units (cost centers, projects, programs).
  3. For each decision unit, prepare a “decision package” that:
  4. Describes activities and outputs
  5. Lists resources required and associated costs
  6. Explains the benefits and strategic alignment
  7. Rank decision packages by value or return on investment.
  8. Allocate funding starting with highest-priority packages until the budget limit is reached.
  9. Review and repeat each period (or rotate reviews across functions to manage workload).

ZBB vs. traditional (incremental) budgeting

  • Traditional budgeting typically adjusts last year’s budget by a percentage and focuses mainly on new expenditures.
  • ZBB requires justification for both recurring and new expenses, starting from zero.
  • Traditional budgeting is quicker and less resource-intensive but can perpetuate inefficiencies.
  • ZBB is more granular and strategic but demands more time and organizational effort.

Example

A construction equipment company notices supplier costs for a component rising 5% annually. Using ZBB, it analyzes whether to continue outsourcing or to produce the part in-house. After comparing costs, capacity, and strategic implications, the company may choose the lower-cost option (in-house production) or justify continued outsourcing based on non-cost factors. ZBB surfaces those trade-offs rather than masking them with an across-the-board percentage increase.

Advantages

  • Encourages cost-conscious decision-making and prevents automatic budget growth.
  • Aligns spending with strategic priorities.
  • Can reveal inefficiencies and opportunities to reallocate resources.
  • Enhances transparency and accountability for managers.

Disadvantages

  • Resource- and time-intensive to prepare detailed decision packages each period.
  • May favor short-term, revenue-generating activities over long-term investments (e.g., R&D).
  • Implementation costs and administrative burden can offset some savings if not managed carefully.
  • Requires strong management discipline and reliable cost/benefit metrics.

Implementing ZBB in organizations (practical tips)

  • Pilot ZBB in a few departments before scaling company-wide.
  • Standardize decision-package templates to streamline reviews.
  • Use a mix of annual full reviews and rotating reviews of functions to reduce workload.
  • Combine ZBB with performance metrics to evaluate long-term projects fairly.
  • Ensure senior leadership clearly communicates strategic priorities to guide ranking.

Applying ZBB for individuals and families

  • Start from zero each month: list income and justify every expense.
  • Categorize expenses (needs, wants, savings, debt repayment) and assign amounts based on priorities.
  • Trim or eliminate low-value recurring expenses uncovered during review.
  • Reassess and reallocate monthly or quarterly to reflect changing goals.

Bottom line

Zero-based budgeting offers a disciplined, strategic way to control costs by requiring justification for all spending. It can drive meaningful savings and better alignment with priorities, but it demands significant time and managerial effort. Organizations and households should weigh the potential benefits against the administrative burden and consider phased or hybrid approaches to capture ZBB’s advantages without excessive cost.