You are on page 1of 14

Presentation

By Yibel H. Gebregziabiher

On
“An evaluation of the budgetary control
system of Sur Construction Plc and
its support to the company’s
performance management and
decision making processes”

1
 Research topic area
 “An organization’s budgetary control system and its links
with performance management and decision making”
 Reasons for selecting the topic
 within my area of expertise
 sufficient literature
 employer support
 IT skill
 Focus organisation
 “Sur Construction Plc”

2
Cont.
 Reasons for selecting
 access to information and employer support
 saves time and cost
 demonstrate research capability to my employer
 Background of Sur Construction plc
 Sur Construction is established in 1992 and engaged in
construction industry in Ethiopia
 Sur is owned by EFFORT, a local rehabilitation institution
 annual turnover, approximately US$ 26 million

3
Cont.
 its fixed assets, nearly US$ 30 million
 1600 permanent employees and about 6700 workers
hired on daily basis
 ISO: 1900:2000 certified company
 there were 15 different project contracts
• 9 road projects
• 5 building projects and
• an airfield project

4
Cont.
 Its mission
 efficiency and effectiveness
 customer focus
 profitability
 Overall Approach
 Objective of the research
• evaluate the budgetary control system of Sur
• links with performance management and decision making
processes within Sur.
• provide recommendation

5
Cont.
 Evaluating Criteria
• administration
• preparation
• control
 Research questions
• how did Sur administer its budget?
• how did Sur prepare its budget?
• how did Sur control implementation of its budget?

6
Cont.
 Assessment variables
• budget committee, budget year, budget officer, and follow up?
• policy communication, key budget factor, budgets, coordination and
master budget?
• type of budget?
• performance reports, variance analysis, and frequency?
• feedback, performance evaluation and decision making?
 Information Gathering
 Sources of information
• secondary data

7
Cont.
 Methods used to collect information
• locations of sources of information
• information collection
• custody of information collected
• return of documents collected
 Limitations of the information gathering
• accuracy
• discrepancies
• two different copies of budget manuals
• annual financial reports not finalised
• bulkiness of internet resources

8
Cont.
 Ethical issues
 integrity
 confidentiality
 Results
 Budget Administration
• a budget manual, with detailed policies and procedures on budget
administration was developed
• but no budget committee, budget officer
• therefore no budget administration
 Preparation
• communication of business plan, standard cost and usage of
resources

9
Cont.
• no key budget factor analysis
• sales budget prepared
• individual annual plans prepared, but not expressed in monetary
terms
• plans were not coordinated

 Control
• performance reports produced by construction departments
• finance department prepared revenue and cost reports without
comparison with budget
• comparison made by the construction department was based on
fixed plan
• also the comparison did not involve variance analysis
• encountered problems were indicated but based on experiences

10
Cont.
 Analysis
 it became clear that the company did not implement a
robust budgetary control system to enhance company
performance and decision making.
 weaknesses
• little top management commitment
• suitable administration procedures were not in place
• Sur did not prepare budget
• sales volume determined traditionally
• unit volume of construction work plan not prepared

11
Cont.
• only plan of activities to be performed were indicated
• resources required were not adequately quantified
• not expressed in monetary terms
• making communication so difficult.
• making coordination impossible
• no direct material purchase plan
• no direct labour plan
• no overhead cost plan
• expenses were paid as they occur, not as planned
• no variances analysis
• flexible plan was not used
• failed to produce well analysed feedback

12
 Effects
• poor planning
• poor communication
• no coordination
• poor control as there was no benchmark
• poor Performance Evaluation
• poor decision making
 Conclusion
• weak budgetary control system both in its design and
implementation
• therefore couldn’t be used to evaluate managers’ performances and
cannot be used for decision making purposes.
13
 Recommendation
 it is recommended that top management should consider
the weaknesses indicated above and take appropriate
remedial actions.

THE END

 Thank You

14

You might also like