⏳ Agile is just Budgeting on a Shorter Timeline

March 29, 2025

Ok, in reality, that's just a catchy title as clickbait... it's quite a bit more nuanced than that.

As I wrap up my term as Rotary President, I’ve been reflecting on the organizational systems that make service clubs work. One of the most important discoveries came from creating a project-based-budgeting — not just to improve day-to-day clarity, but to strengthen governance, empowerment, and reporting.

A budget, I realized, is more than a financial plan. It’s a governance instrument — a way to:

• Distribute decision-making
• Create feedback loops between spending and outcomes
• Align resources with strategic priorities

In retrospect, had I been able to effectively: 1. Form committees 2. Develop a budget in cooperation with the committees 3. Get the budget approved

then I could've more efficiently run our meetings, monitored efforts and allowed members to act with autonomy rather than micro-manage them.

🎯 Budgeting as Empowerment

When budgets are structured by committee or project/initiative, they:

• Empower groups to act within clear boundaries
• Reduce bottlenecks and over-centralized decision-making
• Signal priorities through allocation (strategy in action)
• Enable iteration, since mid-year adjustments are possible

This turns a financial plan into a living system — one that mirrors Agile more than traditional accounting.

🌐 A Universal Organizational Pattern

This appears to be true across other sectors like business, government and other organizations as well. The cycle appears to be:

1. Strategic planning & goal setting
2. Budget approval (governance event)
3. Delegation of authority via allocations
4. Operational execution
5. Reporting & feedback loops
6. Mid-cycle adjustment
7. Renewal in the next cycle

Put simply: the budget is where strategy becomes structure, and structure enables action.

This pattern looks a lot like Agile principles and Sprint Planning. The difference? Agile just runs the same loop on a shorter timeline.

🧠 The Structural Parallel: Governance = Macro-Agile

Perfect — your article is already strong and focused, so we’ll add your new consideration about funds and product scope in a way that fits naturally with your existing structure.

Here’s the recommended update (inserted near your Product Management Implications section), with optional minor context tweaks to keep flow and tone consistent:

🧭 Product Management Implications

My company's annual road-map process follows the same pattern. Leadership sets Objectives and Key Results (OKRs), the CPO in coordination with her team defines high-level concepts or themes, and product teams translate them into Epics and Features — often T-shirt sized with engineering guidance for time budgeting purposes.

Here’s how product management, like agile, lines up with budgeting in concept:

🧩 A Note on Scope and Funds

In both Rotary and product management examples, I’ve described this model assuming a single general fund or single product.
That simplifies the governance loop — one source of funding, one system of priorities, one set of allocations.

However, many real-world organizations operate with multiple funds or portfolios, each with its own objectives, rules, and reporting requirements. For instance:

• Churches, NGOs, and government agencies often manage restricted and unrestricted funds, or grants dedicated to specific purposes.

• Corporations maintain product portfolios — each with independent roadmaps, OKRs, and resource budgets.

• Even service organizations like Rotary might separate operational, foundation, and project accounts.

Each of these effectively runs its own governance loop (plan → allocate → execute → report → adapt), but within the larger umbrella of the organization’s overall mission.

The principle still holds — budgeting is the structure that turns strategy into coordinated action — but each fund or portfolio becomes a micro-system inside the greater system.

🌍 The Bigger Picture

The governance loop is universal:

Set goals → allocate resources → empower teams → gather feedback → adapt → renew.

Whether your budget is in dollars, developer hours or story points, the mechanism is the same. Budgeting is not just accounting — it’s strategy crystallized into structure, and structure unlocking action.

🏁 Conclusion

As my term ends, I’m struck by how organizational design, financial stewardship, and empowerment all converge in a single, humble artifact: the budget.

A well-structured budgeting system:

• Aligns people around shared priorities
• Enables autonomy with accountability
• Creates rhythm and sustainability

For Rotary, that means more community impact. For product teams, it means clearer alignment and execution. For any organization, it’s a foundation for sustainable growth.

💡 Want to see this system in action?
As a bit of a techno-maven, I had to explore building my own solution here. Having worked on generating financial documents manually in Google sheets, a natural evolution was to automate this. To learn more about this you can check it out here: project-based-budgeting

Categories: blog

Tags: product-management, leadership, service, systems