One of the most important basic problems for the transformation of a company is the archaic form in which budgets are usually handled.
Almost every company I know of manages budgets in the same way: every year, in a political meeting, each person defends their project, department or initiative.
After this meeting, each manager receives an annual budget, sometimes with quarterly adjustments depending on whether the company has gone well that quarter or not.
As a result, managers spend a lot of time preparing this meeting to defend their interests as well they can (sometimes not aligned with the company). Because if a project gets a budget for that year, unless there is a resounding failure, it is very difficult for it not to receive something in subsequent years.
This system is one of the culprits of the continuous delays in projects, since in general, with this type of management a delay to improve the product is worthwhile. If you have a budget with this system, if you are going to succeed in launching a project now, you will always decide to delay it.
Because if you implement it now, you run the risk of cancellation or a resounding failure. While if you delay it, surely after some initial anger, you ensure more budget to improve it and ensure a more perfect launch.
Obviously, this way of proceeding goes against the interests of the company, which is interested in launching the initiatives as soon as possible to spend as little as possible if they do not succeed.
Therefore, the usual way of managing budgets is not only inefficient, but it restrains the innovative mentality and restrains any transversal initiative that involves several departments.