Negotiating Team Budgets

Have you ever been at the helm of a project, overflowing with innovative ideas and immense potential, only to encounter the challenging barrier of limited budget resources? It's a familiar scenario in many workplaces. They can pop up during budget cuts, economic downturns, or when a company pivots to new priorities. Perhaps you're leading a team that's been asked to do more with less, or you're in charge of a new initiative that's critical for future growth but currently underfunded. These are the moments when your negotiation skills are put to the test. This is not just a challenge for those at the top but managers at all levels, in various functions and locations, frequently grapple with the need to secure more resources during financially tight times. Because it's about more than just numbers on a spreadsheet. It's about realizing potential, driving innovation, and maintaining momentum in your team. The ability to successfully negotiate for resources in such situations is a skill that can make a significant difference in your career and the success of your projects. Here's some advice on how to effectively navigate these situations:- [1] Start by gaining a deep understanding of your company's financial situation. This insight should guide your approach and help you tailor your request. [2] Clearly articulate the resources you need and why. Show how these resources align with the organization's goals and priorities. [3] Link your request to tangible outcomes. for e.g. How will these resources drive growth, save costs, or improve efficiency? [4] In tight financial times, it's crucial to differentiate between 'must-haves' and 'nice-to-haves'. Focus on what's absolutely essential. [5] Offer alternative solutions. This could mean suggesting phased funding, reallocating existing resources, or exploring cost-effective alternatives. Back up your request with data, examples, or case studies. [6] Make it clear what could be at stake if the resources are not allocated. Acknowledge the financial constraints and position your request as part of a collaborative solution to a shared problem. 👉 Mastering the art of negotiation in tight financial situations is a valuable skill for any leader or manager. ✅ Share this to your network ✅ Follow me on LinkedIn for expert insights ★ DM me for a conversation to learn how we can help you grow & succeed #business #people #leadership #management #negotiation #success #growth #innovation

"We don't have a marketing budget - we're open to your ideas!" Often, this statement translates to, "I don't know how to value our goals, so I'm unsure about what to spend to achieve them." Yet, 99% of agencies respond with, "No worries! We'll draft a proposal with various cost options." This approach is as ineffective as a chocolate fireguard. Instead, here's a more productive approach: ask the right questions upfront. When a brand says they don't have a budget, you might respond with: "Could you share the results you're aiming for?" They might say: "My boss wants us to gain 15,000 new customers in the next 12 months. Our average order value is about £90." You can then say: "Great! So, £90 x 15,000 new customers equals £1.35M in additional revenue. What do you think would be a realistic spend to achieve this in the next 12 months? Typically, investing 10-15% of the desired outcome is a good benchmark. So, a budget of £135,000 - £200,000 should give us a strong chance of hitting your targets. Does that sound fair?" If they reply: "That's more than we're willing to spend right now," You might respond with: "Our priority is your success. Would you be open to adjusting your targets? Spending 10-15% of the desired outcome is a realistic approach for potential returns." They might say: "I can get approval for £100,000, but I'll need to discuss lowering our target with my boss." And voilà! You've established a marketing budget. It might not be the ideal budget for the desired outcome, but at least you've had a mature discussion about expectations versus budget. Now, you can decide whether to work within that budget or help them understand the need for a larger investment. If you can't align, it's okay to walk away. But if they're open to discussing budget and setting achievable KPIs, proceed. This process doesn’t have to be complicated. Keep it simple and straightforward.

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗱𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 💥 Traditionally, companies plan fixed annual budgets, allocate these to existing channels and only make slight changes throughout the year. ⚙ In today’s fast paced world this approach can often be very misleading. 🚨 Agile budgeting refers to continuously reviewing and adjusting budgets based on data to be more responsive and shift focus to best performing channels. ✅ 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆: ♻ Shorter Planning Cycles: Break down annual plans into quarterly or even monthly budgets, giving you more flexibility. 📊 Real-Time Tracking: Set up analytics dashboards and reporting tools to track key performance indicators (KPIs) for each campaign and channel. 🔎 Iterative Reviews: Regularly review budgeting with your team (weekly or bi-weekly). Discuss campaign performance and be ready to shift funds. 🌱 Embrace Flexibility: Be comfortable with the idea that your initial plan might change. Prioritize making adjustments based on data, rather than sticking to a rigid budget. 🔀 Cross-Functional Alignment: Work closely with finance teams to understand any constraints and ensure processes support nimble budget adjustments. What's your approach to budget planning? Let me know in the comments. 💬 - - - 🔔 Want to read more? Follow me Maximilian for regular posts and updates on #digitalmarketing, #lifeatgoogle and #career in tech.

💰 🧮 💸 🎓 A common refrain I hear when talking to college and university trustees: budgets in higher ed are unlike anything in the business world. How colleges make and spend money remains mysterious even to those who've spent their careers in higher education. That's why in the latest installment of the Higher Ed 101 series on the Future U Podcast, Michael Horn and I took a deep dive into college budgeting with Rick Staisloff, a former college CFO and founder of RPK Group. Whether you're a board member, college professor, or tuition-paying parent, this episode offers valuable insights into college budgeting—what works and what doesn't. My three takeaways: 1️⃣ College budget buckets are too large. Most institutions don't really know where they're making money or where they're spending it. "We have to get into unit cost to really understand the financial health of an institution," Staisloff told us. Most colleges don't know how much it costs to graduate a biology major versus an English major, for instance. When enrollment was growing and public funding flowed freely, this approach probably wasn't fiscally responsible but it functioned. Now, when institutions need to be strategic, leaders need greater insight into resource allocation—otherwise they're moving pennies instead of dollars. In other words: show me where you spend your money, and I'll show you what you value. 2️⃣ The lack of transparency leads to lack of accountability. While colleges might set enrollment goals, their leaders often don't know what financial targets they should be hitting. "I'm always struck at the institutions we work with at how seldom deans, chairs, budget unit heads are given a clear sense of what good looks like and what they're supposed to be achieving," Staisloff explained. 3️⃣ It's business intelligence, stupid. My biggest takeaway: how little higher ed leaders know about their business. Part of this is cultural—campuses resist discussing ROI of individual programs. Part is technological—colleges have underinvested in ERP systems, leaving them flying blind in financial forecasting. This becomes increasingly problematic as we face an enrollment cliff and federal funding uncertainty. 🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://lnkd.in/e8zV_PSy 📺 Watch highlights of this episode as well as select full episodes on our YouTube channel: https://lnkd.in/dRRBvpiR I'm biased, but this episode should be required listening for new board members:

The $150k Project I Almost Lost – And How I Saved It in the Final Hour One time, I was leading a project to build a custom payment system for a globally recognized retail brand. Everything seemed to be running smoothly- until it wasn’t. Scope creep, misaligned teams across time zones, and a surprise vendor fee threatened to derail the entire project. I knew I had to act fast. And I use the same Project Rescue Framework every time: Rescue Technique #1: Scope Reprioritization How it works: - Identify non-critical features that can be pushed to Phase 2. - Hold an emergency steering committee to align on priorities. - Focus the team’s effort on delivering the core features first. Rescue Technique #2: Vendor Leverage How it works: - Source quotes from alternative vendors, even if you plan to stick with the original. - Use competitor pricing to renegotiate terms with your current vendor. - Cut down unnecessary licensing fees without impacting quality. Quick note: Don’t threaten to switch vendors hastily – that can burn bridges. A calm and strategic renegotiation works far better. Rescue Technique #3: Time Zone Synchronization How it works: - Avoid relying solely on email updates. - Set up early-morning and late-night syncs with global teams. (not lengthier ones though) - Ensure daily check-ins across regions to avoid communication gaps. If you avoid waiting for the next business day and maintain real-time syncs, you’ll get faster progress Easy, right? Rescue Technique #4: Stakeholder Transparency How it works: - Communicate risks as soon as they arise. - Always Present options, not just problems. - Align on solutions with full stakeholder buy-in. Rescue Technique #5: Budget Guardrails How it works: - Always leave buffer room in the budget for unexpected costs. - Track expenses weekly, not monthly. - Keep stakeholders informed about budget fluctuations early. That’s it! Let me know which one of these techniques you found most helpful in the comments. Happy to dive deeper into any of these strategies in a follow-up post.

𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁. 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆. Let’s stop pretending surprises are the problem. In my work as a PM coach and AI strategist, I see the same silent cost killers across industries and domains. If you're serious about preventing budget blowouts—start here 👇 𝟭. 𝗩𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 ↳ If the goals aren’t clear, neither are the numbers. 👉 Clarity isn't optional. It's the foundation of budget integrity. 𝟮. 𝗢𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗺 𝗕𝗶𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 ↳ “Best-case scenario” isn’t a budget. It’s a trap. 👉 Historical data + pessimism + AI = your best shot at accuracy. 𝟯. 𝗜𝗴𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗛𝗶𝗱𝗱𝗲𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 ↳ Integration. Training. Stakeholder churn. Rework. 👉 Out of sight ≠ , out of scope. Name them. Cost them. 𝟰. 𝗡𝗼 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁 ↳ The scope will change. Budget should too. 👉 Add a formal change reserve—or prepare for firefighting. 𝟱. 𝗪𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 ↳ Risks are registered. But are they costed? 👉 Great PMs budget for risk like CFOs budget for downturns. 🔁 𝗕𝗢𝗡𝗨𝗦: 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗪𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗡𝗼 𝗢𝘄𝗻𝗲𝗿 ↳ “Finance owns the numbers.” “PM owns the plan.” 👉 Translation: No one owns the result. Fix that first. 💡 Budget overruns aren’t fate. They’re friction. And with modern tools—especially AI—we can now identify and mitigate cost drivers before they escalate. Curious how? That’s what I coach. 👇 𝗗𝗿𝗼𝗽 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀. 💬 𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘄𝗱𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘀𝗱𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗮𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆. ♻️ Repost to help PMs control costs without killing team morale. 💾 Save this post for later—it’s your quick checklist for budget sanity. ➕ And follow Markus Kopko ✨ for more. #projectmanagement #budgetcontrol #pmcoach

When budgets tighten, the pressure often falls squarely on the shoulders of finance. But here's the problem: too many finance teams are stuck in a reactive role—focused only on trimming costs instead of shaping smarter strategy. Cuts are made across the board without clarity, and opportunities for long-term impact get lost in the panic. It doesn’t have to be that way. In this week’s newsletter, I share how finance leaders can step up as strategic decision-makers during budget cuts. You’ll find three practical strategies to help guide your organization through financial constraint without compromising its future. These include: 💡Prioritizing spend based on purpose, not just percentages 💡Protecting future-focused investments while streamlining operations 💡Communicating the “why” behind the numbers to preserve trust and morale I work with finance leaders and executive teams to shift the narrative—from reactive cuts to proactive strategy. If your team is navigating tough budget decisions, and you want to emerge stronger, let’s connect. It starts with finance, but it ends with leadership. 📩 Read the full newsletter and let me know which idea resonates most.

Most small businesses default to two forecasting methods: top-down or bottom-up. But they both share the same problem. The "why" behind performance isn't explained. These approaches are easy to model and are used all the time. But they can easily fail as companies grow larger and more driver based. (1) Top-down forecasting Many companies favor top-down because it's simple and aligned with strategic goals. But the biggest drawback is it's often completely disconnected from an operational reality. I use it for high-level financial forecasting and hardly ever for operational planning. • Leadership sets growth or margin targets • The P&L is segmented into business units • These targets cascade down the statements • Line-items are forecast on high-level assumptions (2) Bottom-up forecasting Bottom-up forecasting is based upon detailed inputs such as sales to customers, sales by SKU, hiring plans by individual versus job category or department, expense budgets, etc. The benefit of bottoms-up is it's detailed and grounded in operations. But it's usually time-consuming, fragmented, and hard to roll up consistently. • Individual contributors come up with their numbers • They share it with an accountant or financial analyst • The accounting/finance person puts it into a model • The model is updated constantly with new details (3) Driver-based forecasting Rather than come up with high-level assumptions that don't tie into operations, or granular detail that doesn't separate signal from noise, driver-based combines the best of both. In this example for a professional staffing company, we can tie future revenue to placements per recruiter, contract duration, markup percentage, bill rates, and recruiter headcount. This allows FP&A the ability to flex operating assumptions, test them, and quickly see what can be done on the ground to influence. Differences between the 3 methods matter: Top-down may set revenue at $50 million based upon an 8% growth rate. We can ask "how do we increase growth?" Bottoms-up may set revenue at $50 million based upon a monthly forecast of 200 customers. We can ask "what do we expect from each customer?" Driver-based planning may arrive at the same $50 million but ask "what operational levers can we press to truly move revenue and margin?" The result is forecasts that are faster, more explainable and easier to update. 💡 If you want to explore next-level modeling techniques, join live with 200+ people for Advanced FP&A: Financial Modeling with Dynamic Excel Session 2. https://lnkd.in/emi2xFdZ

Two approaches: Prospect says: “It’s a little out of my budget.” Approach one: “If it wasn’t out of your budget would you move forward today?” Approach two: “Sounds like budget is your only concern.” “Seems like there’s a ceiling to what you want to invest.” Why Approach One Fails: Feels like a trap – Pushes for a commitment, triggering defensiveness. Creates resistance – Frames budget as an obstacle instead of exploring the real issue. Shifts focus to persuasion – Comes off as an attempt to “handle” the objection rather than understand it. Why Approach Two Works: Validates their concern – “Sounds like budget is your only concern” makes them feel heard, lowering resistance. Encourages clarification – If budget isn’t the only issue, they’ll naturally bring up other hesitations. Isolates the objection – If they agree, you now know budget is the true roadblock not something else. Uncovers their comfort level – “Seems like there’s a ceiling to what you want to invest” invites them to share what they’re comfortable paying.

"Should we hire or should we cut?" is a question I'm hearing often from small business owners right now, which is fair given the mixed economic signals. Some clients are seeing their best quarters ever. Others are watching pipelines thin out. Everyone seems to be asking, "How do we plan for what we can't predict?" This is where scenario planning becomes your survival tool; not just hoping for the best, but modeling the reality of different futures. Here's what we walk our clients through: 🌳 The Growth Scenario: For example, if revenue is expected to be up, we’re looking at potential team expansion and higher overhead. Looking at what that does for cash flow given the changes to expected expense changes. 🌱 The Steady Scenario: Where flat growth is expected and we plan to maintain current team, we’ll want to optimize margins and prepare for inevitable per team member increases. There will likely be some percentage increase YOY but we expect the core costs to stay the same. 🍃 The Contraction Scenario: On the other hand, if revenue is expected to go down, we want to look at strategic cuts that allow the team to run efficiently while preserving cash. For our clients, this is usually a mix of team, professional services, and travel. We also want to ensure that the resources kept are used efficiently. Each scenario gets its own financial mode where we map out cash flow, runway, and break-even points for 3, 6, and 12 months ahead. The command center for this? Fathom. We've been using Fathom since the beginning of Little Fish Accounting and it lets us build the scenarios in real-time with clients, showing exactly how each decision ripples through their financials. No more spreadsheet gymnastics or gut-feeling guesses. Ultimately, the founders who survive uncertainty aren't the ones with crystal balls—they're the ones with clear models and decisive action plans. And we're glad to be the builders 🧱