You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Profitability’ tag.
Tagetik provides financial performance management software. One particularly useful aspect of its suite is the Collaborative Disclosure Management (CDM). CDM addresses an important need in finance departments, which routinely generate highly formatted documents that combine words and numbers. Often these documents are assembled by contributors outside of the finance department; human resources, facilities, legal and corporate groups are the most common. The data used in these reports almost always come from multiple sources – not just enterprise systems such as ERP and financial consolidation software but also individual spreadsheets and databases that collect and store nonfinancial data (such as information about leased facilities, executive compensation, fixed assets, acquisitions and corporate actions). Until recently, these reports were almost always cobbled together manually – a painstaking process made even more time-consuming by the need to double-check the documents for accuracy and consistency. The adoption of a more automated approach was driven by the requirement imposed several years ago by United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that companies tag their required periodic disclosure filings using eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL), which I have written about. This mandate created a tipping point in the workload, making the manual approach infeasible for a large number of companies and motivating them to adopt tools to automate the process. Although disclosure filings were the initial impetus to acquire collaborative disclosure management software, companies have found it useful for generating a range of formatted periodic reports that combine text and data, including board books (internal documents for senior executives and members of the board of directors), highly formatted periodic internal reports and filings with nonfinancial regulators or lien holders.
Tagetik’s Collaborative Disclosure Management automates the document creation process, eliminating many repetitive, mechanical functions and reducing the time needed to administer the process and ensure accuracy. Automation can shorten finance processes significantly. For example, our benchmark research on trends in developing the fast, clean close finds that companies that use little or no automation in their accounting close take almost twice as long to complete the process as those that fully automate it (9.1 days vs. 5.7 days). Manually assembling the narrative text from perhaps dozens of contributors and combining it with data used in tables and elsewhere in the document is a time-consuming chore. Regulatory filings are legal documents that must be completely accurate and conform to mandated presentation styles. They require careful review to ensure accuracy and completeness. Complicating this effort recently are increasingly stringent deadlines, especially in the U.S. Anyone who has been a party to these efforts knows that there can be frequent changes in the narratives and presentation of the numbers as they are reviewed by different parties, and those responsible need to ensure that any change to a number that occurs is automatically reflected everywhere that amount is cited in the document; to use the depreciation and amortization figure as an example, that would include the statement of cash flows, income statement, the text of the management discussion and analysis and the text or tables of one or more footnotes. Moreover, automated systems afford greater control over the data used. They make it possible to answer the common question of where a number came from quickly and with complete assurance. While inaccuracies in other types of financial documents may not have legal consequences, mistakes can have reputational or financial consequences.
Those managing the process also spend a great deal of energy simply checking the document to ensure that the various sections include the latest wording, that the numbers are consistent in the tables and text, that amounts have been rounded properly (which can be really complicated) and that the right people have signed off on every part of the filing. Automation obviates the need for much of these tasks. Tagetik’s CDM workflow-enables the process, so handoffs are automated, participants get alerts if they haven’t completed their steps in timely fashion, and administrators can keep track of where everyone is in the process. Workflow also promotes consistent execution of the process, and the workflows can be easily modified as needed.
In designing Collaborative Disclosure Management, Tagetik took advantage of users’ widespread familiarity with Microsoft Excel and Word to reduce the amount of training required to use its product. CDM’s workflow design makes it relatively easy for business users to define and modify business process automation. Typically, individuals or small groups work on different sections of the document. CDM enables multiple contributors from finance, accounting, legal, corporate and other functions to work with their part of the document without being concerned about other contributors’ versions. Work can proceed smoothly, and those administering the process can see at any time which components have been completed, are in progress or have not even started. Tagetik’s software can cut the time required to prepare any periodic document, since once a company has configured its system to create what is in effect a template, it’s relatively easy to generate these documents on monthly, quarterly or annual bases. The numbers relevant to the current period are updated from the specified controlled sources, and references to tabular data within the text are automatically adjusted to tie back to these new figures. Often a large percentage of the narrative text is boilerplate that either must not be updated or requires only limited editing to reflect new information. Starting with the previous edition of the report, contributors can quickly mark up a revised version, and reviewers can focus only on what has changed. Other important automation features are data validation, which reduces errors and revisions, and the system’s ability to round numbers using the appropriate statutory methodology.
CDM also handles XBRL tagging, which is essential for all SEC documents and necessary for an increasing number of regulatory filings around the world. The software specifically handles tagging for the two main European prudential regulatory filings for banks and other credit extending institutions, COREP (Common Reporting related to capital) and FINREP (Financial Reporting performed in a consistent fashion across multiple countries).
Companies can gain several key benefits by automating the production of their periodic regulatory filings and internal or external financial reports that combine text and data. One of the most important is time. Automation can substantially reduce the time that highly trained and well-compensated people spend on mechanical tasks (freeing them to do more productive things), and the process can be completed sooner. Having the basic work completed sooner gives senior executives and outside directors more time to review the document before it must be filed or made public. Time that can be devoted to considering how best to polish the narratives or if necessary lengthen upstream deadlines to handle last-minute developments and consider options for how best to treat accounting events. Automation can also reduce the chance of errors, since the numbers tie directly back to the source systems and (if properly configured) ensure that references in the narratives and footnotes to items in tables and the numbers in those table agree completely. Restatements of financial reports caused by errors are relatively rare but when they occur are exceptionally costly for public companies’ reputations.
Disclosure management systems are an essential component for any financial performance management (FPM) system. All midsize and larger corporations should be using this software to automate the production of their periodic mandated filings and other documents that combine text and data. They will find that they are useful in cutting the time and effort required to produce these documents, provide senior executives and directors more time to review and craft the final versions, and reduce the chance of errors in the process. Companies that are using older FPM software should investigate replacing it with an FPM suite to gain the additional capabilities – including disclosure management – that newer suites offer. Tagetik’s should be among the financial systems evaluated for office of finance.
Robert Kugel – SVP Research
PROS Holdings, a provider of price and revenue optimization software, has an agreement in principle to acquire Cameleon Software, which offers configure, price and quote (CPQ) applications. The combined company is likely to benefit from a broader geographic presence (PROS is based in Houston while Cameleon is in Toulouse, France) for their sales and marketing efforts. However, the longer-term strategic value of the merger lies in the combination of the related categories of price optimization and CPQ to improve sales effectiveness and financial performance.
Price and revenue optimization, which I have written about before, is a business discipline used to effect demand-based pricing; it applies market segmentation techniques to achieve strategic objectives such as increased profitability, greater market share or both. Software to manage price and revenue optimization first came into wide use in the airline and hospitality industries in the 1980s as a way of maximizing returns from less flexible travelers (such as people on business trips) while minimizing the unsold inventory by selling incremental seats on flights or hotel room nights at discounted prices to more discretionary buyers (typically vacationers). Today, it is a well-established part of any business strategy in the travel industry and is increasingly used in others including retailing (chiefly through mark-down management), financial services and many business-to-business verticals. PROS started in the travel and hospitality industry, which accounted for 44 percent of its 2012 revenues, but its recent growth and focus have been more in manufacturing, distribution and services; those customers accounted for 56 percent of 2012 sales.
For its part, CPQ software emerged to make the process of configuring complex products more efficient. This issue is of particular importance for industrial companies that sell to other businesses. A Class 8 truck, for example, has multiple options for mechanical parts such as the engine, transmission and braking system, as well as comfort features for the cab such as air conditioning and the radio/audio system. Assembling the various piece-parts of an offering manually, determining that the configuration is a valid one (for instance, whether transmission Y actually works with engine X) and calculating a basic offer price can be time-consuming and error-prone. CPQ software enables those quoting a price to quickly develop even multiple proposals for a prospective buyer. This is a well-established software category. Our benchmark research shows that about half of all companies with 1,000 or more employees use it, another one-third intend to deploy it and only 17 percent have no plans to use it.
Although valuable on its own, when CPQ software is joined to price and revenue optimization in an end-to-end, lead-to-order process, it increases the effectiveness of that process by giving sellers more ways to intelligently manage volumes and margins through altering the cost of individual components. For instance, the base price of a unit may be priced with little or no markup if the goal is to generate margin on the other parts of the sale. (This is similar to many retailers’ strategies except that the price of each piece of the transaction may be negotiated and the prices involved are often considerably greater.) Optimization software can enable sellers to achieve their revenue and margin targets by using purchase behavior patterns to better assess the buyer’s price elasticity. Indeed, the choice of certain components themselves may provide sellers with clues about the buyer’s overall price sensitivity: For instance, those wanting certain features, brands or grades may be less inclined to negotiate and therefore should be quoted a higher price. (Similarly, certain online merchants have been found to charge buyers using Apple products more than others.) Thus when price optimization is part of the business logic in using CPQ software, it makes the software more helpful to the user.
Viewed from the other side of the combination, adding a native CPQ capability to price and revenue optimization software makes the analytics far more actionable because it can support an end-to-end process. Although PROS has had CPQ capabilities in its Quote2Win application, they are not as robust as what’s available in Cameleon, which provides configuration capabilities and guided selling. PROS has published APIs to facilitate integration with CPQ systems, but integration out of the box with a full-featured application is certainly better. One of the biggest barriers to more widespread adoption of price and revenue optimization is that products don’t always enable user organizations to easily embed the analytics and data that drive optimization directly into the sales process.
Businesses that first adopted price optimization (and which have the deepest penetration) include travel, hospitality and retail mark-down management. Their common characteristic is that all are (or started out as) relatively simple products (say, a round-trip seat or a dress) for which prices are set, not negotiated. Business-to-business (B2B) transactions, however, often are more complex because the product often is a bundle of physical goods, services, warranties and ancillary provisions such as delivery. Moreover, typically these transactions involve some negotiation allow the sales representative a degree of freedom in setting prices and discounts. Having the actual price being quoted is critical for to capture and use in the sales process as our research in sales forecasting found that pricing data is one of the top components in 48 percent of organizations but so is the configuration of products to 22% percent of organizations and want it to be included in the sales forecast. Because the process is more complicated, prospective users of price optimization may find it daunting to adopt the strategy. In theory at least, adding a robust CPQ capability should make it easier for a company to implement a successful price and revenue optimization strategy in a reasonable period of time.
Decades of experience have demonstrated the value of this software category. Without the benefit of price optimization applications, it is almost impossible to assess a customer’s demand elasticity to determine an optimal offer price. Margin may be lost unnecessarily when sales people default to discounting to ensure a sale. Simple up-sell and cross-sell strategies can be beneficial, but they can fall short of what’s optimal and – increasingly – what’s possible. Having software to better gauge price sensitivity and control more elements of a negotiation with greater visibility into its profitability can help companies achieve an optimal balance of revenue and margin. The process can be even more effective when it’s coupled with sales incentive management software. All of which points to improving the sales process and our latest research in sales found that inconsistent execution is the largest impediment in 53 percent of organizations that is motivating management to invest into sales technology like CPQ and pricing optimization.
Organizational issues also have inhibited adoption of price and revenue optimization strategies in industrial companies as well as the use of this category of software. Responsibility for managing profits usually involves both the finance and sales organizations. Both have roles in handling profitability, but the process is typically simplistic (using up-sell and cross-sell strategies with little regard to the profitability of the components), imperfectly coordinated between Sales and Finance and almost never optimized. Ideally, CEOs and COOs should be initiating an optimization effort, but I find this is rarely the case. Using analytics to manage pricing and support a sophisticated strategy is an important business innovation that industrial and other business-to-business verticals should embrace. Finance organizations – specifically the financial planning and analysis (FP&A) group – should take the lead, especially if they want to demonstrate the ability of Finance to deliver more strategic value to the company. Successful price and revenue optimization strategies can provide a sustainable competitive advantage. Companies of course need a pricing strategy; understanding the benefits of price optimization software can help them see what’s possible and develop an implementation plan.
Robert Kugel – SVP Research