The Human Side of Budgeting: Lessons for Local Government Officers and Members

In the world of public finance, budgeting is often seen as a technical, numbers-driven exercise. Yet, in The Human Side of Budgeting, Scott Douglas Lazenby challenges this perception by offering a compelling and refreshingly human-centred perspective. Lazenby, a seasoned city manager with decades of experience in local government, brings a practitioner’s insight to the budgeting process—one that recognises the emotional, political, and organisational dynamics at play.

Unlike many budgeting texts that focus on national or federal systems, Lazenby’s work is rooted firmly in the realities of local government. This makes his insights particularly relevant for officers and elected members working in councils, boroughs, and other local authorities. His central thesis is simple but profound: budgeting is not just about money—it’s about people. The systems we use to allocate resources reflect our values, shape our behaviours, and influence the culture of our organisations.

Subscribe to the Truth about Local Government podcast

In an era where public trust in institutions is under strain, and where local governments face increasing pressure to do more with less, Lazenby’s message is more timely than ever. Transparency, accountability, and collaboration are no longer optional—they are essential. This blog post explores the key lessons from The Human Side of Budgeting and considers how local government officers and members can apply them to build more effective, ethical, and human-centred budgeting practices.

Rethinking Traditional Budgeting Systems

One of Lazenby’s most striking critiques is aimed at the traditional budgeting systems that dominate much of the public sector. These systems, he argues, are often built on a foundation of mistrust. They operate on the assumption that employees—whether officers, managers, or frontline staff—are inherently prone to wastefulness or self-interest unless tightly controlled. As a result, the budgeting process becomes rigid, adversarial, and overly focused on compliance rather than outcomes.

This mistrust manifests in various ways. For example, many councils operate under a “use it or lose it” mentality, where departments are incentivised to spend their entire budget allocation by year-end, regardless of actual need. This leads to inefficient spending and undermines long-term planning. Similarly, the emphasis on line-item budgeting—where every pound must be accounted for in advance—can stifle innovation and discourage departments from adapting to changing circumstances.

Lazenby encourages us to see these dysfunctions not as the result of bad actors, but as the predictable outcomes of flawed systems. When people are treated as untrustworthy, they often respond in kind. Conversely, when they are trusted and empowered, they are more likely to act responsibly and creatively. For local government officers and members, the takeaway is clear: we must move away from budgeting systems that are rooted in suspicion and control. Instead, we should design processes that reflect trust in professional judgement and a shared commitment to public service. This means giving departments more flexibility, focusing on outcomes rather than inputs, and recognising that good budgeting is as much about relationships as it is about spreadsheets.

Emphasising Collaboration Over Control

Another key theme in Lazenby’s work is the importance of collaboration. Traditional budgeting processes are often hierarchical and adversarial, pitting departments against each other in a zero-sum game for limited resources. Finance teams are seen as gatekeepers, while service managers are cast as supplicants. This dynamic not only breeds resentment but also undermines the strategic coherence of the organisation.

Lazenby proposes a different model—one based on partnership and mutual respect. In this model, budgeting is a collaborative exercise in which all departments work together to align resources with shared goals. Finance officers are not just enforcers of fiscal discipline; they are facilitators of dialogue and stewards of organisational values. Service managers, in turn, are not just budget holders—they are strategic leaders who understand the financial implications of their decisions.

This collaborative approach requires a cultural shift. It means creating spaces where open, honest conversations can take place—where departments can share their challenges, explore trade-offs, and co-create solutions. It also means recognising that budgeting is not a once-a-year event, but an ongoing process of learning and adaptation.

One practical way to foster this culture is through cross-departmental budget workshops. These sessions bring together officers from different services, along with finance staff and elected members, to discuss priorities, explore synergies, and build a shared understanding of the council’s financial landscape. Such workshops can help break down silos, surface hidden assumptions, and build the trust needed for effective collaboration.

For elected members, this collaborative model offers a more holistic view of the organisation. Rather than being presented with a list of competing bids, they can engage in strategic conversations about how best to serve the community with the resources available. For officers, it creates a more supportive and empowering environment in which to do their work.

Transparency as a Cultural Value

Transparency is often cited as a core principle of good governance, but Lazenby challenges us to think more deeply about what it really means in the context of budgeting. Too often, transparency is equated with simply publishing financial data—posting spreadsheets online or including detailed appendices in council reports. While these actions are important, they are not sufficient. True transparency, Lazenby argues, is about making budgeting understandable and accessible. It’s about demystifying the process so that both elected members and the public can engage with it meaningfully. When budgeting is opaque or overly technical, it breeds suspicion and disengagement. People assume the worst when they don’t understand what’s going on.

For officers, this means communicating financial information in ways that are clear, concise, and relevant. It means using plain language, avoiding jargon, and focusing on what the numbers actually mean for services and outcomes. Visual tools—such as dashboards, infographics, and scenario models—can be particularly effective in helping people grasp complex information quickly. For elected members, transparency is about asking the right questions and demanding clarity—not just about how much is being spent, but why, and to what effect. It’s also about being transparent in return—sharing the political and community pressures that shape decision-making, and being honest about the trade-offs involved.

One powerful example of transparency in action is the use of plain language budget summaries. These documents distil the key elements of the budget into a format that is accessible to non-specialists, highlighting the main priorities, changes, and implications. When combined with public engagement efforts—such as budget consultations or citizen panels—they can help build trust and legitimacy. Ultimately, transparency is not just a technical requirement—it’s a cultural value. It reflects a commitment to openness, accountability, and shared understanding. And in a time when public confidence in institutions is fragile, it is more important than ever.

Budgeting as a Management Tool, Not Just an Accounting Exercise

One of the most transformative ideas in The Human Side of Budgeting is Lazenby’s assertion that budgeting should be viewed as a management tool rather than merely an accounting exercise. In many local authorities, the budget is treated as a static document—a ledger of costs and expenditures, designed primarily to ensure compliance and control. While financial discipline is undoubtedly important, this narrow view misses the broader strategic potential of budgeting.

Lazenby encourages us to see the budget as a living framework for decision-making. It is not just about tracking how money is spent, but about aligning resources with the council’s strategic goals. When used effectively, the budget becomes a roadmap for achieving outcomes, guiding departments in prioritising initiatives, evaluating performance, and adapting to change. This shift in perspective has profound implications for both officers and elected members. For officers, it means integrating financial planning with service delivery and organisational strategy. Budget discussions should not be confined to finance teams—they should involve service managers, policy leads, and operational staff. Everyone should understand how their work contributes to the council’s overall objectives and how financial decisions support or hinder that mission.

For elected members, the challenge is to move beyond cost-based scrutiny and ask more strategic questions. Instead of focusing solely on how much a proposal will cost, members should ask: How does this align with our strategic plan? What outcomes will it deliver? How will we measure success? This approach fosters more meaningful debate and ensures that financial decisions are grounded in the council’s values and priorities.

Lazenby also advocates for performance-based budgeting, where funding is linked to results rather than inputs. This model encourages departments to think in terms of impact and effectiveness, rather than simply maintaining existing levels of service. It also supports continuous improvement, as departments are incentivised to innovate and demonstrate value. In short, budgeting should be a dynamic, strategic process—one that empowers leaders to make informed choices, adapt to emerging needs, and deliver better outcomes for the community.

The Role of Trust in Budgeting

Trust is a recurring theme throughout Lazenby’s work, and he places it at the heart of effective budgeting. In many councils, budgeting is characterised by suspicion—between departments and finance teams, between officers and elected members, and sometimes even between the council and the public. This lack of trust can lead to defensive behaviours, poor communication, and a reluctance to take risks.

Lazenby argues that trust is not a luxury—it is a necessity. Officers must trust departments to manage their budgets responsibly, making decisions that reflect both operational needs and strategic priorities. Departments, in turn, must trust that finance teams are there to support them, not to police them. And elected members must trust officers to provide honest, balanced advice—even when that advice is politically inconvenient.

Building this culture of trust requires intentional effort. It starts with transparency and openness—sharing information freely, explaining decisions clearly, and acknowledging uncertainty. It also requires consistency and fairness—ensuring that budgeting rules are applied evenly and that departments are treated with respect.

In politically charged environments, trust can be particularly fragile. Budget decisions often involve difficult trade-offs, and there may be pressure to protect certain services or pursue popular initiatives. In such contexts, it is vital that officers and members engage in honest, respectful dialogue. Disagreements are inevitable, but they should be grounded in shared values and a commitment to the public good.

Councils can also foster trust by creating opportunities for collaboration and joint problem-solving. Budget forums, strategy sessions, and cross-functional working groups can help build relationships and break down barriers. When people feel heard and valued, they are more likely to act in good faith and support collective decisions. Ultimately, trust is both a prerequisite and a product of good budgeting. It enables better decisions, stronger relationships, and a more resilient organisation.

Learning from Pathological Budgeting Behaviours

One of the more candid and insightful aspects of Lazenby’s book is his discussion of pathological budgeting behaviours—those dysfunctional patterns that emerge when systems are poorly designed or misaligned with human nature. These behaviours are not the result of bad people, but of bad incentives and structures.

Among the most common pathologies are hoarding, gaming the system, and last-minute spending. Departments may hoard resources out of fear that future budgets will be cut. They may game the system by inflating requests or hiding savings. And they may engage in frantic year-end spending to avoid losing unspent funds. These behaviours are wasteful, demoralising, and ultimately counterproductive.

Lazenby’s key insight is that these behaviours are symptoms, not causes. They reflect a budgeting system that prioritises control over collaboration, punishment over trust, and short-term compliance over long-term value. Reforming the system—by introducing more flexibility, transparency, and strategic alignment—can help reduce these behaviours and create a healthier organisational culture.

For local government officers and members, this is an opportunity for reflection. What budgeting behaviours have you observed in your council? Are there patterns that suggest underlying dysfunctions? What might be causing them—and how could the system be redesigned to encourage more constructive behaviour? Addressing these issues requires courage and leadership. It means challenging entrenched practices, questioning assumptions, and being willing to experiment with new approaches. But the rewards are significant: a more efficient, ethical, and effective budgeting process that serves both the organisation and the community.

Empowering Staff Through Budgeting

Finally, Lazenby emphasises the importance of empowering staff through the budgeting process. Too often, budgeting is seen as the domain of finance professionals, with limited involvement from service managers or frontline staff. This not only limits the quality of decision-making but also undermines ownership and engagement.

Lazenby advocates for decentralised decision-making where appropriate, allowing departments to take greater responsibility for their budgets. This approach recognises that those closest to the work often have the best understanding of what is needed and how resources can be used most effectively.

Empowerment also means providing the tools and support that staff need to succeed. Financial literacy training, budget planning workshops, and mentoring programmes can help managers build confidence and competence in financial matters. When staff understand the budget and feel equipped to manage it, they are more likely to take initiative, innovate, and contribute to strategic goals.

For officers, this means investing in capacity-building and creating a culture of learning. For elected members, it means supporting policies that decentralise authority and encourage professional development. And for the organisation as a whole, it means recognising that budgeting is not just a technical task—it is a leadership opportunity.

One practical step is to offer regular training for service managers on budgeting principles, financial analysis, and strategic planning. These sessions can be tailored to different levels of experience and can include case studies, simulations, and peer learning. By building financial capability across the organisation, councils can create a more resilient and responsive budgeting process. Empowered staff are more likely to take ownership of their work, make informed decisions, and contribute to a culture of accountability and excellence. And in the complex, ever-changing world of local government, that is a goal worth pursuing.

Political Realities and Budgeting

One of the most refreshing aspects of The Human Side of Budgeting is that Lazenby does not shy away from the political dimensions of budgeting—in fact, he embraces them. Too often, budgeting is presented as a purely technical or administrative task, divorced from the messy realities of politics. But in local government, politics is not a distraction from budgeting—it is an integral part of it.

Lazenby recognises that elected members operate under different incentives and pressures than officers. They are accountable to the public, subject to electoral cycles, and often driven by community concerns, party priorities, or personal convictions. These dynamics can create tension between political aspirations and financial constraints, but they are also a vital part of democratic governance.

Rather than trying to eliminate politics from budgeting, Lazenby encourages honest, respectful conversations between officers and members. Officers must be willing to present the full picture—including the difficult trade-offs and potential risks—while members must be open to hearing the “bad news” early. Avoiding uncomfortable truths may be politically expedient in the short term, but it often leads to worse outcomes down the line.

For elected members, this means asking probing questions, but also listening carefully to professional advice. It means recognising that not every good idea is affordable, and that prioritisation is a necessary part of leadership. For officers, it means understanding the political context in which decisions are made and providing information in a way that supports informed, balanced choices.

Ultimately, budgeting in local government is a shared responsibility. Officers bring expertise, data, and operational insight; members bring vision, values, and democratic legitimacy. When both sides engage in open, constructive dialogue, the result is not only better budgets—but better governance.

Moving from Expenditure-Based to Revenue-Based Budgeting

A particularly thought-provoking idea in Lazenby’s book is the call to shift from an expenditure-based mindset to a revenue-based one. Traditional budgeting systems tend to focus almost exclusively on how money is spent—allocating funds to departments, tracking expenditures, and ensuring compliance with spending limits. While this is important, it can obscure a more fundamental question: Where is the money coming from, and is it sustainable?

Lazenby argues that local governments need to pay more attention to the revenue side of the equation. This means understanding the sources of income—whether from council tax, business rates, grants, or fees—and considering how these revenues align with service demands. It also means being transparent about the link between services and funding, so that both officers and the public can see the full financial picture.

A revenue-based approach encourages long-term thinking. Instead of simply asking whether a new initiative is affordable this year, councils should ask whether it is sustainable over time. What are the ongoing costs? What are the risks to the funding source? How might changes in the economy, legislation, or demographics affect revenue streams?

This perspective is particularly important in times of fiscal uncertainty. When revenues are volatile or declining, councils must make difficult choices about what to fund and what to scale back. A revenue-based mindset helps ensure that these decisions are grounded in financial reality, rather than wishful thinking.

One practical example of this approach is to clearly show how a proposed service expansion will be funded—not just in the current year, but over the medium term. This might involve identifying new revenue sources, reallocating existing funds, or phasing in costs gradually. By linking services to funding sources transparently, councils can build trust and make more resilient decisions.

Building a Better Budget Culture

Perhaps the most important—and most challenging—lesson from The Human Side of Budgeting is that culture matters. Budgeting is not just a set of processes or tools; it is a reflection of organisational values, behaviours, and relationships. If the culture is one of mistrust, fear, or rigidity, even the best-designed systems will struggle to deliver good outcomes. Lazenby’s model calls for a different kind of culture—one based on openness, curiosity, and respect. It is a culture where people feel safe to speak honestly, where departments collaborate rather than compete, and where learning is valued over blame. Building this kind of culture takes time, leadership, and persistence.

For officers, this means modelling the behaviours they want to see—being transparent, listening actively, and treating others with respect. It means creating opportunities for dialogue, reflection, and shared learning. For elected members, it means engaging with the budget not just as a financial document, but as a tool for shaping the future of the community. Culture change is never easy. It requires challenging old habits, confronting uncomfortable truths, and being willing to experiment. But it is also deeply rewarding. A healthy budget culture leads to better decisions, stronger relationships, and a more resilient organisation. As Lazenby reminds us, budgeting isn’t just a technical task—it’s a human one. It is about how we work together, how we make choices, and how we serve our communities. Let’s treat it that way.

Conclusion

The Human Side of Budgeting offers a powerful reminder that behind every budget line is a person, a decision, and a value. Scott Douglas Lazenby challenges us to move beyond the mechanics of budgeting and to consider the relationships, behaviours, and cultures that shape financial decisions in local government. From rethinking traditional systems and embracing collaboration, to fostering trust, empowering staff, and integrating political realities, the book provides a roadmap for more ethical, effective, and human-centred budgeting. It encourages us to see budgeting not as a constraint, but as a tool for achieving our shared goals.

For local government officers and elected members, the challenge is to reflect on your current budgeting culture. What assumptions underpin your processes? What behaviours are being rewarded or discouraged? What one change could you make to bring your budgeting practice closer to the values of trust, transparency, and collaboration?

Perhaps this reflection could be the start of a wider conversation—within your team, your department, or your council. Why not start a book club discussion around The Human Side of Budgeting? Or host a workshop to explore how its ideas could be applied in your context? Budgeting will always be complex and sometimes contentious. But with the right mindset and the right culture, it can also be a powerful force for good.