In our previous articles, we explored how finance teams are rethinking planning cycles and embracing greater agility to navigate today’s economic uncertainty. In this edition, we are turning our attention away from FP&A and to the office of the controller, and the vital role financial controllers play in helping organisations steer through volatility. 

 

As the global economy remains unsettled by inflation, supply chain disruption, and shifting trade policies, CFOs are under pressure to deliver timely, accurate insights. Yet many finance teams are still burdened by lengthy close cycles that delay decision-making. 

 

Some more of the recent data available shows that more than half of finance teams take over five business days to close the books, with nearly a third requiring more than a full week and while the idea of a “three-day close” garners attention, it remains aspirational for most. In fact, top-performing organisations are generally achieving monthly closes in an average of 5–6 days whereas many mid-sized companies still spend up to two weeks closing their books.. 

What is clear however is that, ongoing economic uncertainty is increasing the need for speed and agility in financial reporting. When conditions are unpredictable, CFO’s need to focus on what they can control i.e. cash flow and costs, and finance teams cannot afford to wait two weeks for accurate monthly results, they need near-real-time visibility to make informed decisions. When done right, a faster close, means data is available sooner, enabling quicker reactions to emerging risks or opportunities. 

 

However, speed alone is not the goal, as the data must be of good quality and accurate for it to be trusted and used in the decision-making process. Unfortunately, trust in the data is often lacking with nearly 40% of CFOs admitting they do not completely trust the accuracy of their organisation’s financial data. So how can CFOs accelerate the close cycle while ensuring accuracy, control, and confidence in the financials? 

 

When we look at a traditional month-end, close processes are often siloed, manual, and prone to delay. Each business unit consolidates its results manually in spreadsheets, manual account reconciliations pile up, and finance teams are busy chasing down discrepancies across disparate systems. It’s common in these scenarios to find that over 60% of the close activities occur outside the ERP system, in spreadsheets and emails, due to disparate systems and manual work. Sometimes organisations are dealing with separate sub-ledgers, multiple ERPs, and offline workflows meaning data has to be reconciled and consolidated by hand, introducing errors and eating up precious days in the close cycle. 

A lack of standardised procedures or automation forces teams to be constantly fire fighting, spending the first week of each month gathering data and fixing errors rather than analysing results. Typically in these scenarios, the bottlenecks are usually before the final reporting and reconciling fragmented data, aligning systems, and correcting manual errors the biggest offenders in delaying the close. This is in turn leads to delayed view of the results and limits the finance teams effectiveness in managing risk. 

 

However, by contrast, when we look at a organisations who have adopted a modern “intelligent” close processes their finance function looks very different. These organisations have invested in and adopted best in class technology and processes and in turn have transformed their close cycle. These modern approaches replace the end-of-month scramble with ongoing, embedded workflows. Below are some of the key differences we see in these organisations. 

Rather than juggling multiple disconnected ledgers and spreadsheets, modern organisations use integrated platforms such as an EPM solution to bring together consolidation, reconciliation, and reporting in one environment. In this scenario, all entities’ data feeds into a central platform providing a single source of truth, eliminating the need for manual data wrangling. 

 

Additionally we see activities that once took days of manual effort are now automated. For example, Account reconciliations, identified as the #1 most time-consuming close task can be automated using tools such as EPM. Some companies have achieved near-100% automated reconciliations, eliminating almost all manual ticking-and-tying. This not only speeds up the close, but also reduces errors and enhances compliance. Automation also handles journal entries, intercompany eliminations, currency translations, and variance analysis, drastically cutting down the manual workload. 

In these organisations we also see that, instead of treating the close as a once-a-month sprint, their finance teams adopt continuous processes. They reconcile key accounts daily or weekly (rather than waiting until month-end), and they move tasks earlier in the cycle whenever possible. For example, accruals, intercompany mismatches, or data errors are identified and resolved in real time throughout the period. This means when day 0 or day 1 of the new month arrives, much of the work is already done and there are no more last-minute surprises. In turn what you see is that organisations that operate this way report fewer surprises at period-end and greater confidence in decisions, since any issues have been resolved long before the month is over. 

 

In addition the above we also tend to see these organisations adopt modern close solutions that include workflow tools that assign tasks, track progress, and enforce accountability across the finance organisation. This clarity reduces delays waiting for approvals or information. Dependencies and hand-offs are managed in a centralised close calendar, and everyone knows their responsibilities and deadlines. In contrast to ad-hoc email chains, a purpose-built close management tool provides real-time visibility into the status of close activities. Managers can see, for instance, which reconciliations are done and which are pending, in real time, and address bottlenecks immediately. This connected approach enable much smoother collaboration and breaks down silos between accounting, finance, and other departments. 

 

To summarise, traditional versus modern close is the difference between a fragmented, manual marathon and a unified, automated sprint. Companies that cling to legacy close practices, heavy spreadsheets, disconnected systems, and end-period heroics, find themselves taking weeks to close, with higher risk of errors. Those embracing intelligent, unified finance systems are closing in mere days, with greater accuracy. Organisations that invest in automation, standardised processes, and integration “are closing books in days, while those reliant on manual processes take weeks”. 

 

In next week’s article, we’ll explore how unifying consolidation and reconciliation can radically transform your finance team. 

 

If you're exploring how EPM might benefit your organisation,or want to understand how to better utilise your current EPM platform, we would welcome the opportunity to share further insights with you. Y You can contact us through our website www.intelligent-enterprises.com or email michelle@intelligent-enterprises.com