GELT has been in a financial crisis although the board of directors has not realized it so. To recap the different alternative solutions in the previous discussion, it would be advantageous to first name the solutions. The first solution which we will name as ‘new budget proposal’ entails that Dobbs, the president-elect of GELT, construct a new budget proposal that would satisfy the board of directors but will somehow compromise the financial stability of the organization. In the second solution, which is designated as ‘former budget proposal’, the previous budget proposal which was presented to the board but was not approved will be strengthened and again be presented but this time after convincing each member of the board and thoroughly explaining the details of the proposal.
The very issue in the GELT case actually concerns the organization’s budget. A budget is the forecast of expenditures and expenses for a specific period of time, thus, it is a manifestation of an organization’s set of priorities and goals (Fisher).
It is therefore important that enough attention is given when proposing a budget. The two solutions in the GELT case actually differ merely in the structure of the budget proposal and yet, this difference determines the outcomes that the organization may endure in the future.
Hence, it is important that each solution be weighed and analyzed. Criteria on how to weigh the two alternatives is given in Table 1. Ease of implementation refers to the simplicity of the solution; artistic freedom refers to the limitless options for the artistic field; cost is the initial investment needed to implement the solution and effectiveness is the measure of success of the solution.
In ease of implementation, the former budget proposal is better than the new budget proposal. The former budget proposal would only entail an effort from Dobbs wherein she has to individually convince the members of the board. Although such effort is tricky, it will only involve the president and the only crucial part is the convincing step. Unlike in the new budget proposal, the budget committee will again convene to formulate a new budget that would most likely be similar to proposals of previous years. After which, the theater organization will find ways on how to reduce expenditures and increase revenues throughout the year. The criterion for artistic freedom, on the other hand, will favor the new budget proposal.
This is due to the fact that the budget will be enormous and thus, will stimulate the creativity of the theater productions. However, if the former budget proposal is implemented, the artistic freedom of the theater organization will be restricted due to the meager budget. This is explicitly stated by Roberta Mackie, chair of the costume committee. Another factor that can determine the outcome of the crisis is that of cost. Cost, here, is that which will require the least initial investment. Analyzing the two solutions, one can say that the former budget proposal will need the least financial investment since it will only involve the convincing ability of the president and her advocates.
On the other hand, the new budget proposal will require greater financial investment since as have been discussed previously; the theater organization will need to find sponsors and benefactors for their cause and this will need financial input for promotions, research and even transportation. Lastly, effectiveness covers the over-all success of the solution, meaning, the solution effectively satisfies the main problem of the case in line with the organization’s priorities and goals.
In this part, the new budget proposal has the advantage since it will not limit the theater’s creativity and scope. Furthermore, it will give an impression that the organization is really focused on theater arts and not on financial matters. The said option will also expand the organization since it will involve other organizations interested in the arts.
On the other hand, the former budget proposal is deemed less effective since it does not guarantee that the priorities and goals of the organization will be met. Although it will specifically solve the financial problems of the organization, and it is easier to implement, it is not the best action to take. The former budget proposal may even split the board of directors into two factions if it will be implemented.
|Ease of implementation (20%)||Artistic freedom (25%)||Cost (20%)||Effectiveness (35%)|
|New budget proposal||10||25||10||35|
|Former budget proposal||20||10||20||15|
Fisher, Louis. Budget. Microsoft® Encarta® 2007 [CD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation, 2006.