Why is this variable a driver?
A budget line describes an outcome. A driver explains why it changes. Start with the decision, then choose inputs with a defensible causal or predictive relationship to that outcome.
AFP’s guidance favors a small number of meaningful inputs, measurable predictive relationships and controlled model scope. More calculation steps can create more opportunities for error. [source]
A useful driver model makes the relationship understandable and testable. It also separates what management can influence from external assumptions that need scenario treatment.
Make the relationship inspectable
The following is an editorial working template. Use it to document one important relationship before expanding the model.
| Field | Illustrative revenue example |
|---|---|
| Decision | How would a demand change affect revenue and capacity? |
| Driver | Units sold by product family |
| Assumption | Base, upside and downside demand by period |
| Source & owner | Sales forecast; accountable commercial owner |
| Dependency | Units × net price, with product mix kept visible |
| Financial destination | Revenue; downstream cost and working-capital effects |
| Scenario behavior | Change volume while explicitly checking price, capacity and inventory assumptions |
| Validation | Reconcile to actuals and explain deviations before reuse |
Choose the drivers the decision needs
| Outcome | Candidate drivers | What to validate |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | Volume, price, mix, contracts | Price definition, demand constraints and timing |
| Material cost | Units, consumption, purchase price, yield | Quantity structure, cost concept and scenario date |
| Workforce | FTE, start dates, compensation, attrition | Hiring timing, cost components and capacity constraints |
| Inventory | Production, lead time, stock policy | Flow, valuation and cash timing |
| Receivables / payables | Sales / purchases, payment terms | Collection and settlement assumptions |
| Capex / depreciation | Investment timing, asset life, capacity | Commissioning, capitalization and cash schedule |
Set a boundary on model detail
Keep granularity that changes a decision or provides an essential reconciliation. Product-level, entity-level or employee-level detail should earn its place through usefulness, ownership and maintainability.
Do not infer causality from a correlation alone. Test the relationship against business constraints and historical behavior; record where the relationship breaks under a scenario.
Explore the Planning Logic & Driver Mapping SprintSources & research notes
The guide builds on the supplied Deep Research Report and the supplementary Loyos bi / Allevo research reviewed on 11 October 2026. The references below identify this page’s evidence. Vendor documentation establishes a stated capability; implementation fit and outcomes require separate validation. Editorial frameworks and illustrations are identified in the text.
- AFP: Driver-based Models and Plans ↗Professional association guidance · 5 March 2024 · Reviewed 11 October 2026
Help improve this research.
Send the claim, product or release, a dated source and the correction you propose.