However, the process is often marred with instances of administrative lapses. According to this case, policy making in budgeting and finance sector is a highly consultative process. Consequently, there arise accountability concerns, a common phenomenon in group undertakings. It therefore calls for stance and clear observation of organizational principles to ensure credibility and timely delivery of quality services. According to Wilson, politics and the centralized administrative system of the United States has a great influence on critical decisions. This consequently negatively impacts on the activities of the experts. This observation is supported by works of Goodnow, Taylor, Weber, Gulick, McGregor and Lindblom.
The public administrative sector has for a long time been under limelight for mismanagement instances that have often resulted into institutional loss of finances. In fact, different people have often viewed the sector from different perspectives, with some supporting the current management setups while a greater majority is opposed to the management systems. Working in the local government, budgeting and finance section, there have been many administrative issues, some of which are critically explored in this case analysis. Basically, budget involves formulation of proposed financial undertakings by a firm, clearly defining out projected financial sources and expenditures. This is a process that is very critical in ensuring accountability and prioritization. In the public perspective, the budget making process aids in minimizing taxation concerns, limiting possible over- taxation. The process is also credited for helping in identification of scarce resources and consequently strategically using them to meet essential and basic needs.
However, this sector is at times faced with the challenge of effectively dealing with the many competing interests of the many players