The Problem With Deferring Decisions

We launched the new YNAB exactly one week ago. It’s been a little bit crazy, mostly the good kind.

Now that many of you have gotten in there and tried the new product, you are starting to realize there are some fundamental differences from YNAB 4.

It’s true. We made some philosophical reinforcements to the YNAB method in the new YNAB. One we’ve been hearing a lot about centers around how you deal with reimbursement expenses, or—at the 3,000 foot view—Rule Three: Roll With The Punches.

This is a workflow that we completely revamped in the new YNAB and we know it is an adjustment if you are used to doing it a certain way. I am one of those people who is affected. I’ve carried negative balances forward since as long as I’ve used YNAB. And I had to ask myself, “Wait, how will I do this now?”

But here is the key point, there is money you have spent and that spending needs to be addressed. As you address that spending, you will find Rule One: Give Every Dollar A Job, is strengthened.

And I don’t just mean this in light of reimbursements, I mean many of us (myself, included) would employ Rule Three in such a way that we could defer decisions because of overspending. I could look, overspend a little bit on vacation like this last month, and say, I will handle that later.

Deferring the decision is the core problem. With the new workflow you are making decisions now, based on now. And your category balances are accurate.

(Watch the video. It really helps to understand where we are coming from.)


If you can’t wait until next week for more whiteboard wisdom, you can subscribe to our YouTube channel here. If you have a question or an idea you’d like us to address in a future Whiteboard Wednesday episode—we’d love to hear from you—at [email protected]