Traditional budgeting is characterized by an annual, centralized process. Its primary criticisms are rigidity (inability to adapt to external market changes mid-year), a fixation on cost reduction/variance analysis over value creation, and the pre-allocation of resources ("use it or lose it" mentality), which prevents managers from accessing funds when new opportunities arise.

Beyond budgeting advocates for decentralization and adaptive processes. Its criticisms (or implementation challenges) stem from this flexibility. It requires a radical cultural shift (decentralization) that is structurally difficult to implement. Furthermore, the removal of a fixed central budget creates risks regarding cost control (potential overspending) and relies heavily on local decision-making, which carries the risk of sub-optimal decisions if goal congruence is not achieved.

Hope, J., & Fraser, R. (2003). Beyond Budgeting: How Managers Can Break Free from the Annual Performance Trap. Harvard Business School Press. (Analysis of traditional budgeting flaws: rigidity, cost focus, pre-allocation).

CIMA (Chartered Institute of Management Accountants). Official Terminology, 2005 Edition. (Definitions of budgeting and control).

ACCA Technical Article. Budgeting – the beyond budgeting approach. Section: "Benefits and problems of beyond budgeting". (Discusses the cultural hurdles and risks of decentralization).

Libby, T., & Lindsay, R. M. (2010). Beyond budgeting or budgeting reconsidered? A survey of North American budgeting practice. Management Accounting Research, 21(1), 56-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2009.10.003. (Academic review of implementation difficulties and control risks).

Rickards, R. C. (2006). Beyond Budgeting: Boon or Boondoggle?. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 3(2). (Discusses the "radical decentralization" risks and lack of fixed spending plans).