PPBE (Planning-Planning-Budget-Execution System), is a multi-year, overlapping and rolling budget cycle process, which consists of four phases of planning, programming, budgeting, and execution. The purpose of PPBE is to establish a link between policy objectives and budgeting and form an effective defense resource allocation system with optimized combination of manpower, equipment, and support under certain resource constraints. Since the 1960s, PPBE has continued to make revisions and reforms with increasing changes of political, institutional environment. There were three important reforms, Laird reform, The Goldwater-Nichols Defense Restructuring Act, and Rumsfeld Reform. Since Rumsfeld's reform, the adjustment and development of PPBE is mainly to improve the efficiency of resource. Although budget management has its own emphasis in different periods, last development of PPBE is mainly flexibility, conciseness, and efficiency improvement. This paper reviews the evolution process and the latest development by historical analysis. After more than 60 years of evolution and development, PPBE continues to play an important strategic management function in the US Department of Defense. The study found that PPBE is more challenging for large organizations to maintain normal operation and improve adaptability and responsiveness in uncertain environments. In the 21st century of conflict and uncertainty, it would be long-time challenge for PPBE to trade off increasing defense demand and decreasing financial constraints. Therefore, it is worthy of further studying how to improve the budget capability of PPBE participants in the future.
| Published in | American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business (Volume 6, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17 |
| Page(s) | 98-105 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Strategic Planning, Defense Resource Allocation, PPBE
| [1] | Schick, A. (1973). A death in the bureaucracy: the demise of federal PPB. Public Administration Review, 146-156. |
| [2] | Church, A. T. & Warner, T. (2009). DoD Planning Programming Budgeting and Execution System: A Path Toward Improvement. JFQ: Joint Force Quarterly (53), 80-84. |
| [3] | Chwastiak, M. (2001). Taming the untamable: planning, programming and budgeting and the normalization of war. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26 (6), 501-519. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00010-1. |
| [4] | Team, J. D. C. S. (2004). Joint Defense Capabilities Study: Improving DoD Strategic Planning, Resourcing, and Execution to Satisfy Joint Capabilities: US Department of Defense. |
| [5] | Grimes, S. R. (2008). PPBS To PPBE: A Process Or Principles? ARMY WAR COLL CARLISLE BARRACKS PA. |
| [6] | Melese, F., Appleby, C. & Larsen, B. (2006). A review and update of public budgeting in defense: Leveraging a new management model for government. DRMI Working Papers Ongoing Research. |
| [7] | Jones, L. R., Candreva, P. J. & DeVore, M. R. (2014). Financing National Defense: Policy and Process. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Incorporated. |
| [8] | Fast, W. R. U. (2010). IMPROVING DEFENSE ACQUISITION DECISION MAKING. Defense AR Journal, 17 (2), 220-241. |
| [9] | Jones, L. R. & McCaffery, J. L. (2005). Defense acquisition and budgeting: Investigating the adequacy of linkage between systems. International Public Management Review, 6 (2), 87-115. |
| [10] | Benson, L. R. (2015). Melvin Laird and the Foundation of the Post-Vietnam Military, 1969-1973. Air Power History, 62 (4), 58-59. |
| [11] | Jones, L. R. & McCaffery, J. L. (2005). Reform of the Planning, Programming, Budgeting System, and Management Control in the U.S. Department of Defense: Insights from Budget Theory. Public Budgeting & Finance, 25 (3), 1-19. |
| [12] | Potvin, L. (2013). Practical Financial Management: a handbook for the Defense Department Financial Manager//2013. |
| [13] | College, U. S. A. W. (2015). Army Organization in How the Army Runs: A Senior Leader Reference Handbook (2013-2014). |
| [14] | Congress, U. S. (2007). National defense authorization act for fiscal year 2008: S. |
| [15] | Bertuca, T. (2014). DOD Begins Major Planning, Programming, Budgeting And Execution'Reset'. Inside the Navy, 27 (50), 11. |
| [16] | Hale, R. (2016). A Role For DoD's New Under Secretary. Available at: https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2016/08/03/a-role-for-dod-s-new-under-secretary/. Accessed 10-03, 2019. |
| [17] | Raj Gnanarajah. (2019). Defense Primer: FY2018 Department of Defense Audit Results. Available at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=IF10913. Accessed. |
| [18] | Blume, S. V. & Lauren, F. (2017). A Brief History of Defense Budget Instability: Center for a New American Security. |
| [19] | Andrew, H. (2019). Budget Strategy Mismatch. Armada International, 43 (6), 34. |
| [20] | Sharp, T. (2019). DID DOLLARS FOLLOW STRATEGY? ANALYSIS OF THE 2020 DEFENSE BUDGET REQUEST. Available at: https://csbaonline.org/research/publications/did-dollars-follow-strategy-a-review-of-the-fy-2020-defense-budget. Accessed. |
| [21] | West, W. F., Lindquist, E. & Mosher-Howe, K. N. (2009). NOAA's Resurrection of Program Budgeting: Déjà Vu All Over Again? Public Administration Review, 69 (3), 435-447, 370. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.01990.x. |
| [22] | Gansler, J. S. & Lucyshyn, W. (2015). Reforming acquisition: This time must be different: MARYLAND UNIV COLLEGE PARK CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND PRIVATE ENTERPRISE. |
| [23] | McCaffery, J. & Jones, L. (2007). Budgeting and Acquisition Business Process Reform. |
| [24] | Daniels, S. P. (2019). Understanding DoD’s Defense-Wide Zero-Based Review. Available at: https://defense360.csis.org/understanding-dods-defense-wide-zero-based-review/. Accessed 12-10, 2020. |
APA Style
Lixiang Chen. (2020). PPBE: Research on Operation and Latest Development. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business, 6(4), 98-105. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17
ACS Style
Lixiang Chen. PPBE: Research on Operation and Latest Development. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Bus. 2020, 6(4), 98-105. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17
AMA Style
Lixiang Chen. PPBE: Research on Operation and Latest Development. Am J Theor Appl Bus. 2020;6(4):98-105. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17,
author = {Lixiang Chen},
title = {PPBE: Research on Operation and Latest Development},
journal = {American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business},
volume = {6},
number = {4},
pages = {98-105},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajtab.20200604.17},
abstract = {PPBE (Planning-Planning-Budget-Execution System), is a multi-year, overlapping and rolling budget cycle process, which consists of four phases of planning, programming, budgeting, and execution. The purpose of PPBE is to establish a link between policy objectives and budgeting and form an effective defense resource allocation system with optimized combination of manpower, equipment, and support under certain resource constraints. Since the 1960s, PPBE has continued to make revisions and reforms with increasing changes of political, institutional environment. There were three important reforms, Laird reform, The Goldwater-Nichols Defense Restructuring Act, and Rumsfeld Reform. Since Rumsfeld's reform, the adjustment and development of PPBE is mainly to improve the efficiency of resource. Although budget management has its own emphasis in different periods, last development of PPBE is mainly flexibility, conciseness, and efficiency improvement. This paper reviews the evolution process and the latest development by historical analysis. After more than 60 years of evolution and development, PPBE continues to play an important strategic management function in the US Department of Defense. The study found that PPBE is more challenging for large organizations to maintain normal operation and improve adaptability and responsiveness in uncertain environments. In the 21st century of conflict and uncertainty, it would be long-time challenge for PPBE to trade off increasing defense demand and decreasing financial constraints. Therefore, it is worthy of further studying how to improve the budget capability of PPBE participants in the future.},
year = {2020}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - PPBE: Research on Operation and Latest Development AU - Lixiang Chen Y1 - 2020/12/31 PY - 2020 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17 DO - 10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17 T2 - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business JF - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business JO - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Business SP - 98 EP - 105 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2469-7842 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtab.20200604.17 AB - PPBE (Planning-Planning-Budget-Execution System), is a multi-year, overlapping and rolling budget cycle process, which consists of four phases of planning, programming, budgeting, and execution. The purpose of PPBE is to establish a link between policy objectives and budgeting and form an effective defense resource allocation system with optimized combination of manpower, equipment, and support under certain resource constraints. Since the 1960s, PPBE has continued to make revisions and reforms with increasing changes of political, institutional environment. There were three important reforms, Laird reform, The Goldwater-Nichols Defense Restructuring Act, and Rumsfeld Reform. Since Rumsfeld's reform, the adjustment and development of PPBE is mainly to improve the efficiency of resource. Although budget management has its own emphasis in different periods, last development of PPBE is mainly flexibility, conciseness, and efficiency improvement. This paper reviews the evolution process and the latest development by historical analysis. After more than 60 years of evolution and development, PPBE continues to play an important strategic management function in the US Department of Defense. The study found that PPBE is more challenging for large organizations to maintain normal operation and improve adaptability and responsiveness in uncertain environments. In the 21st century of conflict and uncertainty, it would be long-time challenge for PPBE to trade off increasing defense demand and decreasing financial constraints. Therefore, it is worthy of further studying how to improve the budget capability of PPBE participants in the future. VL - 6 IS - 4 ER -
Information
Email: