Slow Closers Aren’t Serious about Improving Financial Performance

March 28, 2012 7:40 am 0 comments Views: 13

Share this Article

  • TwitterTwitter
  • Facebook
  • DeliciousDelicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleuponStumble
  • RedditReddit

Tags:

Business Performance Management (BPM) Controller Operational Performance Management (OPM) report Workforce Performance Management (WPM)

Based on our newly completed benchmark research “Trends in Developing the Fast, Clean Close”, it appears that closing falls into this category. This is especially true for companies that are slow closers, by which we mean those that take more than five or six business days (essentially one business week) to complete their monthly, quarterly or, for those that publish their financial statements only twice yearly, semiannual close. Our research shows that in general there has been no progress in achieving fast closes – indeed, there’s been some backsliding – over the past five years and, indeed, since our initial research on this subject in 2004.

The one-week close is a generally accepted metric that reflects the business need to have complete and accurate financial and management accounting data available as soon as possible. Faster closing means that companies can spot and address opportunities and issues sooner. In this respect, closing faster is an important way that finance departments can play a strategic role in their company. As well, corporations that are required to provide their financial statements to third parties (such as a securities regulatory body or a lender) must meet deadlines, and freeing up additional time to create and review the narratives or other related analyses can help ensure that their reports meet all requirements. on the other hand, failure to close in the one-week time frame suggests that an organization has process, management, data or technology issues (or some combination of these) that must be fixed.

Ventana Research has investigated the closing practices of more than 1,000 midsize and larger organizations since 2004. Our new findings show that compared to our 2007 benchmark, companies are taking longer to close their books – on average 5.7 days for the monthly close (up from 5.2 days in 2007) and eight days for the quarterly close, up from 7.5 days five years ago. (Quarterly closes are usually more complex and therefore take longer to complete.) In 2004, the averages were 5.3 days monthly and 7.3 days quarterly. The latest research also shows that 41 percent of companies made no change in the length of their closing period over the past two years; another 41 percent decreased it, while the remaining 18 percent experienced an increase. The distribution of responses five years ago were largely the same.

Why did the average closing time lengthen since 2007? One factor may be that, according to half of the participants, economic and regulatory events have increased their workload. These companies more often said their time to close increased over the past two years. Companies that take longer to close after their quarter now gather more information than in the past and have to do additional levels of review and checking for errors. Some may be doing it with a smaller permanent staff than before.

In the context of the days-to-close data, the pattern we discern from these three benchmark projects is that over many years, companies have had a static average time to close with some year-to-year fluctuation around this mean. We see several scenarios here. Sometimes, for example, a company finds that its quarterly close has increased by a day and then establishes a target to reverse that. Another may decide to shorten it by two days, achieves that for several months and then falls back into its old pattern. Either case would account for the fact that over the better part of a decade there has been no permanent change for the better.

In my judgment, the serious issue is not with fast or average closers. Completing the close in a day or two is laudable, but I think it’s difficult to fault companies that can close in five or six business days when so many are taking longer. When some companies are able to close within a week while others with almost identical characteristics (such as industry, size, geographic location, IT complexity, and degree of centralization in the accounting function) take more than a week, it makes one wonder why there should be such a disparity. If our hypothesis that companies’ closing times changes little over the years is correct, slow closers made no meaningful progress over the past decade. This has remained the case despite all the attention paid to the importance of closing faster by accounting thought leaders, consultants and the business media, as well as consistent recognition by slow-closing participants in our research of the need to cut days from their closing period and their avowals that reducing the interval is very important.

I think the main reason why so many slow-closing finance departments have not accelerated their process is poor management. Here’s why.

One of the best ways to start shortening the close is simply to be serious about doing it. In our new research, three-fourths (77%) of companies that put a program in place to shorten their close reported a time reduction over the past two years. Only 15 percent of those that said they had taken no deliberate steps achieved a reduction in that period. Like those couch potatoes, companies that take longer to close may have good intentions but take no concrete action to shorten their close. While 54 percent of those that take six days or fewer to close have such a program in place, just 41 percent of those that take nine or more days have taken methodical steps.

The new research once again shows that there is no silver bullet that will shorten the close. It requires diligence and forethought – in short, good management. Better process management (including having monthly or quarterly reviews to identify factors that are slowing the close), improving data quality and using more of the right software are the broad areas that slow closers need to address.

So if it’s feasible to complete the accounting close in five or six business days, why don’t more companies do it? My guess is that like many things that happen in finance departments, inertia is a big factor. It’s also possible that many slow-closing finance departments have made adaptations (such as doing incomplete “flash” reports at the end of the month or quarter) to get around the delay that would be intolerable if executives and managers had to wait for two or more weeks. Unfortunately, all of these adaptations consume people’s time – time that could be better spent concentrating on fixing the root causes of slow closes. There may be many reasons for companies taking more than a week to close their books, but no excuses.

Ry Robert Kugel, from: http://robertkugel.ventanaresearch.com/2012/03/20/slow-closers-arent-serious-about-improving-financial-performance/ 

Related Posts SliderRelated Posts
CFOs entered 2012 with lower expectations about the economy, their company's earnings, internal and external risks, hiring and other factors, based on results from Deloitte's fourth-quarter survey of large-company CFOs. ...
READ MORE
People who perform the financial planning and analysis (FP&A;) function in the finance organization put together and update the budgets and forecasts. In many companies, the “A” portion of this ...
READ MORE
Economic and European Financial Woes Take Toll on
Putting the “A” Back in FP&A (Financial Planning

Leave a Reply



× 6 = forty two

Latest News

  • FYI

    It’s Friday the 13th, so Should We Be Worried?

    Well, actually, yes.

    There have been enough financial disasters on Friday the 13th over the years to make us all a little nervous. Traders are notoriously a superstitious lot anyway. On Friday 13th, noticeably less business gets done.

    Read more →
  • FYI

    The World’s 50 Most Innovative Companies- 16: National Marrow Donor Program

    Bone-marrow transplants are a numbers game. Ten thousand Americans annually require a transplant from someone unrelated to help treat leukemia or lymphoma. Yet only 5,573 received one worldwide last year.

    Read more →
  • FYI

    People With Bigger Brains Have More Friends

    Oxford University researchers found maintaining friendships requires more brain power.

    Their study concluded that people with real friends have to use more cognitive skills to understand what someone else thought.

    This, however, did not occur with “online” friends, such as those made on social networking sites including Facebook or Twitter.

    Read more →
  • Green Tech

    Five technologies to watch

    Innovation in energy technology is taking place rapidly. Five technologies you may not have heard of could be ready to change the energy landscape by 2020.

    Recent breakthroughs in natural-gas extraction highlight the speed with which game-changing technologies can transform the natural-resource landscape. Just over the horizon are others—such as electric vehicles, advanced internal-combustion engines, solar photovoltaics, and LED lighting—that are benefiting from the convergence of software, consumer electronics, and traditional industrial processes. Each has the potential to grow by a factor of ten in the next decade.

    Read more →
  • FYI

    The World’s 50 Most Innovative Companies- 17: Greenbox

    Here are five words every children’s clothing chief hopes to hear in her lifetime: Disney wants to work together. Fangfang Wu heard them last year, when the House of Mouse asked the CEO of Greenbox, a children’s clothier based in Shanghai, to manufacture a line of Disney-branded apparel.

    Read more →
  • Biz Intelligence Featured

    How To Identify The Tipping Point In Any System

    The term “tipping point” crops up frequently, especially in discussions of world events such as financial collapse and climate change. Like the word “sustainable” which gets used with increasing abandon, and often with little thought to the actual meaning of the word, so too the term tipping point can be elusive and used in contexts where it may or may not be suitable. I’ve probably been guilty of this myself, but recently my thinking on the subject has been greatly clarified and I hope to pass on what I’ve learned about what does, and does not, constitute a tipping point.

    Read more →
  • Management

    A CEO’s guide to innovation in China

    Dynamic domestic players and focused multinationals are helping China churn out a growing number of innovative products and services. Intensifying competition lies ahead; here’s a road map for navigating it.

    Read more →
  • FYI

    The World’s 50 Most Innovative Companies- 18: Jawbone

    Jawbone, whose $1.5 billion valuation makes it one of the hottest private companies in the world, is setting the standard for today’s gadget startups: Invest heavily in eye-catching design and innovative interfaces, and master a globe-crossing supply and manufacturing process that allows for frequent and spectacular upgrades.

    Read more →