Making the Case in Terms Leadership Funds

Every budget ask an identity team makes has to answer one question: "So what?"

Building identity reporting that went to the C-suite every month taught me that every number has to answer it. A funding request is no different.

A request in the team's terms sounds like this: people and funding to automate how access is granted, changed, and removed. It is a real need. On its own, it tells leadership the team is busy and wants more.

So keep asking "So what?" until the answer lands on something leadership already cares about, the way the five whys works.

Access removed within a day of someone leaving. So what? Former employees can no longer get in. So what? The audit finding that keeps coming back finally closes.

Faster access for people joining through an acquisition. So what? They can start working sooner, and the deal starts delivering what it promised.

An owner and an end date for every service account and agent. So what? When an agent does something it should not, someone can stop it before it reaches customer data or disrupts operations. So what? The AI investment leadership already made does not get paused after the first incident.

The ask has not changed. It now answers three things leadership is already worried about. It may still not be funded in full, but the conversation is about which risk to fund first, and leadership knows how to have that conversation.

The operating model frames identity in the terms executives and boards already use: revenue, growth, cost, risk, and time. The translation has to be honest. If the numbers are stretched, leadership will find out, and the next ask gets harder.

Before the next budget conversation, write the ask in the team's terms first. Then ask "So what?" of each piece until it reaches an audit finding, a delayed initiative, or a cost leadership already tracks. Ask for something that shows a result within a quarter or two, so it helps make the next case. For a small team, one ask with a clear answer is enough.

When the answer is no, write the risk down and ask the person who owns it to sign a time-bound risk acceptance. A risk with a name and a date on it is much harder to leave off the next budget.

I still run every ask through "So what?" before it goes in front of leadership.

Related

• Series 2 Post 7: LinkedIn post
• Series 3 Post 1: LinkedIn post
• Series 3 Post 3: LinkedIn post