Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Ibm%20 fmi%20accelerating%20transformation%20using%20benchmarks%20final%2026092013

328 views

Published on

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ibm%20 fmi%20accelerating%20transformation%20using%20benchmarks%20final%2026092013

  1. 1. © 2013 IBM Corporation This presentation was developed and delivered by IBM Canada for Financial Management Institute Capital Chapter event “Transformation and Financial Challenges in 2013-2014”. No part of this presentation may be circulated, quoted, or reproduced for distribution without prior written approval from IBM Transformation and Financial Challenges in 2013-2014 September 26, 2013 Accelerating Transformation using Benchmarks
  2. 2. © 2013 IBM Corporation Agenda  Benchmarking Public Sector Financial Management to Private Sector Financial Management  Adopting Leading Practices in the Government  Transformation Case Studies & Lessons Learned September 26, 20132
  3. 3. © 2013 IBM Corporation Speakers  Svina Dhaliwal, CMA, PMP – Managing Consultant, Strategy and Transformation, IBM Global Business Services – 12 years of experience in the public sector – 8 years of consulting experience – Expertise in: financial planning, budgeting, reporting, costing, finance Strategy, performance measurement, contract management, business case development, project management September 26, 20133  Kim Butler, CGA, PMP – Associate Partner, Strategy and Transformation, IBM Global Business Services – Practice Lead, Shared Services & Finance Transformation, Public Sector Canada – Over 25 years of experience in the public & private sectors – 15 years of executive management consulting expertise – Expertise in: Program and project management, shared services, Finance strategy and transformation, executive client management, and organizational transformation management
  4. 4. © 2013 IBM Corporation Benchmarking Public Sector vs. Private Sector  Benchmarking allows organizations to: – Establish a baseline – measure and compare with similar organizations – Identify potential areas for improvement and best practices – Assess appropriate targets and serve as a business case for change  Where does the data come from for IBM’s Benchmarking Program? – Primary research, such as new global surveys conducted by IBM, combined with partner research – Founded in APQC's Open Standards Benchmarking – Data is continually being updated, validated and normalized  Where did the leading practices come from? – Primarily from IBM projects and research as well as publicly available sources – Intellectual capital generated from the Open Standards Benchmarking Collaborative  What type of metrics are used? – Cost Metrics – Efficiency (FTE-based) Metrics – Cycle-time Metrics  What type of organizations are included in the Public vs. Private Sector benchmarking? – Public Sector: includes all branches; Executive, Legislative, Support Orgs, etc. and all levels of government and public sector entities – Private Sector: all industries 4 September 26, 2013 - Median – midpoint value in the distribution; half of respondents perform below and half perform above. - Benchmark – 80th percentile in the distribution; 80% of the respondents perform below and 20% perform above.
  5. 5. © 2013 IBM Corporation An illustrative Finance & Accounting Business Component Model will help guide our discussion today on four focus areas DirectControlExecute Accounting Close and Consolidation Close Coordination and Scheduling Financial Reconciliation Accounting Guidelines Pre-close Execution Close & Consolidation Adjusting Entry Review & Approval Accounting Policies External Financial Reporting Financial Statements Preparation Regulatory Reporting & Public Accounts Production Regulatory Inquiries Handling External Reporting – Statutory Policy Financial Disclosure Requirements Reporting Compliance Monitoring Detective Self-Audit Financial Statements Approval Audit Support External Reporting – Non Statutory Policy External Reporting Guidelines Funding & Corporate Finance Revenue & Funding Policies Cash Management Revenue & Funds Processing Revenue & Funding Guidelines Funding Allocations Revenue & Funds Requests Source of Funds TB Submissions Input to ARLU Input to Estimates CPP and EI Recoveries Accounting Operations / Transaction Processing Accounts Payable Processing Travel and Expense Processing Journal Entry Review & Approval Monitor Authority and Limits Delegation Account Reconciliation Finance Policy Monitoring (Including Asset) Loans & Accounts Receivable Processing Journal Voucher Processing Interdepartmental Settlement Processing Financial Policies (Including Asset) Financial Guidelines (Including Asset) Acquisition Card Payment Processing Credit and Collections Financial Procedures & Business Rules Asset Reconciliation Tracking & Mgmt Asset Accounting Budgeting & Forecasting Budget and Forecast Policy Strategic Planning & Target Setting Budget Development Operational Planning Budget Policy Monitoring Budget to Actual Variance Analysis Forecast Preparation Capital Planning Budget Plan Approval Forecast Analysis & Monitoring Budget Guidelines Financial Management Controls Framework Financial Risk Monitoring Financial Management Control Framework Financial Controls & Compliance Reporting Financial Controls & Compliance Monitoring Fraud Management Financial Risk Scoring and Evaluation Financial Risk Reporting Financial Risk Identification and Ownership Financial Risk Framework Establish Financial Controls & Authorities Funding & Corporate Finance Revenue (budget) & Funding Policies Cash Management Revenue (budget) & Funds Processing Revenue (budget) & Funding Guidelines Funding Allocations Revenue (budget) & Funds Requests Source of Funds TB Submissions Management Input to ARLU Input to Supplementary Estimates Input to Main Estimates, RPP & DPR TB Submissions Budgeting & Forecasting Budget and Forecast Policy Strategic Planning & Target Setting Budget Development Operational Planning Budget Policy Monitoring Budget to Actual Variance Analysis Forecast Preparation Capital Planning Budget Plan Approval Forecast Analysis & Monitoring Budget Guidelines 5
  6. 6. © 2013 IBM Corporation Benchmarking Public Sector Financial Management to Private Sector Financial Management - Accounts Payable Processing September 26, 2013 Not for Distribution6 Accounts Payable Processing Metrics Median Benchmark Gov’t BM vs. Private BMGov’t Gov’t Private Cost Total cost of the process "process accounts payable" per one thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $1.19 $0.74 $0.33 +126% Personnel cost (including benefits) of the process "process accounts payable" per one thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $0.62 $0.48 $0.23 +114% Systems cost of the process "process accounts payable" per one hundred thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $10.69 $7.27 $2.48 +193% Efficiency Number of FTEs for the process "process accounts payable" per one billion Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. 11.59 5.97 4.75 +26% Number of invoices processed per "process accounts payable" FTE. 5,194 11,281 18,219 -38% Number of invoice line items processed per "process accounts payable" FTE. 13,279 47,500 72,833 -35% Number of disbursements per "process accounts payable" FTE. 3,666 6,018 7,857 -23% Cycle- Time Cycle time in days from receipt of invoice until approved and scheduled for payment. 11.00 7.00 5.00 +40%  Processing payments of operating expenses and other direct or indirect vendor charges. Notes: • Total cost includes personnel, systems, overhead, outsourced and other costs for the process. Typically, a lower cost is considered “better,” all other variables (quality, productivity, cycle time, efficiency) being equal. • The median represents the midpoint value in the distribution. This is the level at which half of respondents perform below and half perform above.
  7. 7. © 2013 IBM Corporation Adopting Leading Practices in the Government Accounts Payable Processing  High usage of Purchase orders for both goods and services (>80%)  Process small differences without escalation for resolution. Sampling is used to detect irregularities.  Use digital imaging technology for document processing and storage.  Receive invoices electronically from suppliers  Automate invoice routing through workflow automation.  Integrate the accounts payable system with the procurement system to achieve automated electronic matching (invoice / PO / Receipt documentation)  Fully integrated purchasing, payables, inventory management and General Ledger systems  Segregation of duties between supplier set up, invoice processing and payment processing  Effective and continuous reduction in invoice volumes through use of procurement cards, invoice consolidation, etc.  Require vendors to consolidate invoices as much as possible  Where vendors will not consolidate invoices, consolidate payment of multiple invoices into a single payment  Capability to remit funds and remittance advices electronically and/or via the web, as payment options such as e- cash and web-based funds transfer emerge  Provide on demand access to financial information internally through self service capabilities and to suppliers  Centralized A/P organization. Shared services centre for transaction processing in a multi-location, multi-division organization  Standardize A/P systems, policies and procedures. 7 September 26, 2013
  8. 8. © 2013 IBM Corporation Metrics Median Benchmark Gov’t BM vs. Private BMGov’t Gov’t Private Cost Total cost of the process "process expense reimbursements" per one thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $0.24 $0.12 $0.04 +239% Personnel cost (including benefits) of the process "process expense reimbursements" per one thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $0.08 $0.05 $0.02 +136% Systems cost of the process "process expense reimbursements" per one hundred thousand Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. $1.58 $0.54 $0.29 +88% Efficiency Number of FTEs for the process "process expense reimbursements" per one billion Canadian Dollar revenue / budget for Government. 2.64 1.02 0.86 +18% Number of T&E disbursements per "process expense reimbursements" FTE. 3,478 13,516 11,572 +17% Cycle- Time Cycle time in days to approve and schedule T&E reimbursements. 2.50 2.00 3.00 -33% Benchmarking Public Sector Financial Management to Private Sector Financial Management - Travel & Expense Processing September 26, 2013 Not for Distribution8 Travel and Expense Processing  Processing advancements and reimbursements for employee travel and expenses on the organization’s behalf. Notes: • Total cost includes personnel, systems, overhead, outsourced and other costs for the process. Typically, a lower cost is considered “better,” all other variables (quality, productivity, cycle time, efficiency) being equal. • The median represents the midpoint value in the distribution. This is the level at which half of respondents perform below and half perform above.
  9. 9. © 2013 IBM Corporation Adopting Leading Practices in the Government Travel & Expense Processing  Reimburse T&E expenses through direct deposit (through payroll system)  Maximize use of common corporate credit card.  Use common, consolidated expense management software across the organization  Reimburse expenses with receipts valued above risk threshold, and without receipt below risk threshold (i.e. $75)  Do not provide travel advances  Track travel and expenses to the level of detail required for control and risk thresholds (i.e. air fare, meals, parking, taxi, etc.)  Use digital receipt imaging.  Where the company is to pay the cost of travel directly, e.g. for a conference block booking, purchase orders are raised through the procurement process.  Maximize automated data population for expense claim creation.  Process claims in centralized processing or shared services centers  Provide on demand access to policy and expense-tracking information  Train all employees on the expense reimbursement process, policies and system.  Employees should book all travel through the authorized travel agent, who ensures that the booking is with preferred suppliers and in line with policy.  Implement policies/systems to process expense reports electronically  Maintain a clear, simple expenses policy with appropriate tolerances and levels of authorization.  Employee details maintained by Human Resources, but payment details held and maintained by AP to process payment 9 September 26, 2013
  10. 10. © 2013 IBM Corporation Metrics Median Benchmark Gov’t BM vs. Private BMGov’t Gov’t Private Cost Total cost of the process "process accounts receivable" per customer receipt. $116.96 $9.95 $2.65 +275% Total cost of the process "process accounts receivable" per invoice processed. $86.32 $11.48 $1.63 +604% Total cost of the process "invoice customer" per invoice processed. $215.31 $77.03 $5.58 +1290% Total cost of the process "invoice customer" per invoice line item processed. $84.21 $18.83 $0.99 +1802% Effic- iency Number of invoices processed per "invoice customer" FTE. 6,229 40,500 102,941 -61% Cycle-Time Average days sales outstanding (measures timeliness between sale of goods or services, and receipt of payment). 39.00 22.40 31.00 -28% Cycle time in days from transmission of invoice to receipt of payment. 21.5 10.8 18.0 -40% Benchmarking Public Sector Financial Management to Private Sector Financial Management - Loans & Accounts Receivable Processing September 26, 2013 Not for Distribution10 Loans & Accounts Receivable Processing  Processing loans and accounts receivable transactions including payments, defaults, interest expense to ensure that balances reflect the actual amounts owing. Notes: • Total cost includes personnel, systems, overhead, outsourced and other costs for the process. Typically, a lower cost is considered “better,” all other variables (quality, productivity, cycle time, efficiency) being equal. • The median represents the midpoint value in the distribution. This is the level at which half of respondents perform below and half perform above.
  11. 11. © 2013 IBM Corporation Adopting Leading Practices in the Government Loans & Accounts Receivable Processing  Regular forecast of cash receipts available for treasury purposes  Employ cycle billing to reduce periodic surges in billing levels  Take advantage of automated links between systems to reduce process cycle time  Integrate system with billing, collection, AP and GL.  Electronic invoicing & collection – automated according to credit terms  Automated tools to assist in: overdue balance follow-up, exception invoices, etc.  Net out payables and receivables and only pay/collect the difference between them  Color-code remittance courtesy reply envelopes for accelerated processing.  Easily accessible summaries of debtor days, daily collection, aging  Automatic flagging and reporting of high risk accounts – Aged debit balances should be reviewed by management on a regular basis and explanations sought as to why debts have failed to be recovered.  Use of workflow software to monitor process and help resolve queries – Image processing to facilitate online query handing  Online customer interface allowing suppliers/customers to update and amend set fields such as contact delivery details and view a breakdown of their outstanding account details – one single interface for customers.  Shared services centre for transaction processing - Cross-functional teams for customer support, order entry and dispute resolution  Clearly defined and communicated AR guidelines – Materiality limits for automatic write-off tolerances – Focus on error reduction activities 11
  12. 12. © 2013 IBM Corporation Metrics Median Benchmark Gov’t BM vs. Private BMGov’t Gov’t Private Efficiency Number of journal entry line items per "perform general accounting" FTE. 40,385 77,869 153,618 -49% Percentage of journal entry line items that are corrective/adjusting. 3.00% 1.55% 0.66% +135% Cycle-Time Cycle time in days to perform monthly close at the business entity level. 10.00 7.00 6.00 +17% Cycle time in days to produce period end management reports. 13.00 10.00 9.00 +11% Benchmarking Public Sector Financial Management to Private Sector Financial Management - Close & Consolidation Processing September 26, 201312  Reviewing preliminary trial balance and adjustments and performing final review of P&L and balance sheet.  Combining two or more entities for reporting purposes. This includes the elimination of inter-company transactions between consolidated entities. Close & Consolidation Notes: • Total cost includes personnel, systems, overhead, outsourced and other costs for the process. Typically, a lower cost is considered “better,” all other variables (quality, productivity, cycle time, efficiency) being equal. • The median represents the midpoint value in the distribution. This is the level at which half of respondents perform below and half perform above.
  13. 13. © 2013 IBM Corporation Adopting Leading Practices in the Government Close & Consolidation Processing  Simplify and standardize the chart of accounts – Standardizing and streamlining an organization's charts of account can dramatically improve the speed of the close process. – By establishing a focused and consistent set of accounts across business sites, an organization can effectively measure business performance in accordance with strategic objectives, as well as reduce consolidation time during the close process.  Automate the financial close  The generation of consolidated reporting from a data warehouse is an automated process, driven by pre- set consolidation rules.  At the point of transfer for consolidation purposes, information is automatically checked for errors of omission and for incorrect periods.  The ability exists for consolidations to drill down to the original records in any entity.  For all consolidation items, transactions are recorded in the same account name and code in each legal entity's general ledger to facilitate and simplify the consolidation process  Simplify departmental relationships as far as possible for consolidation purposes  Journal entries kept centrally at their source 13 September 26, 2013
  14. 14. © 2013 IBM Corporation TRANSFORMATION CASE STUDIES & LESSONS LEARNED 14 Not for DistributionSeptember 26, 2013
  15. 15. © 2013 IBM Corporation Case Study: Province of Nova Scotia Background  Province of Nova Scotia entered into a 10 year contract with IBM for SAP Application Managed Services with an annual commitment for SAP Capital Transformational Project work  SAP Managed Services Scope includes Level 1 Service Desk, Break Fix, Technical System Maintenance, System Monitoring, Minor Enhancements, Standard Operational Changes Business need  Implement Common business processes to better facilitate management of all business/operational functions and decision making across the Gov Departments & Entities  Consolidate SAP instances across Functions and Departments  Leverage the IBM Managed Services Transition as the lever to consolidate remaining SAP Support teams into one Shared Services operated by IBM with one Government retained organization to support multiple broader Province of Nova Scotia Public Sector Clients and Environments  Economic Development to keep and build new jobs in Nova Scotia to help provide a long term facility to grow talent to service their needs and other clients across North America and Globally Solution approach  Solution consisted of three components: 1. 10 Year SAP AMS + Projects, cost neutral to PNS fixed over the term  Including IBM to offer comparable job offers with sign on bonus to all impacted staff (unionized and non unionized) 2. Development of an IBM Services Centre to grow a pool of talented resources (500 over 6 years) to support the Province of Nova Scotia’s business and technology needs as well as other clients across North America and Globally 3. Partnership with 7 Post Secondary Institutions to develop curriculum, and provide Analytics software to support the development of skill graduates for local IBM jobs  Initial scope for consolidation and transition of the SAP Support Centre as one Shared Services to support the Province of Nova Scotia, Department of Health, Nova Scotia Municipalities, Nova Scotia School Board, Nova Scotia Liquor corp, etc  With the long term cost stability of their operating budget, PNS is now working with IBM on transformational initiatives through Projects to help drive further business and cost benefit for the Province of Nova Scotia Outcomes • Province has achieved one Shared Service and COE for SAP Service Management and have saved significant money to date consolidating one support organization • Province of Nova Scotia, through efficiencies in the contract and IBM’s delivery to date, is actually spending less than their initial budget and currently are using these savings to help fund transformational initiatives
  16. 16. © 2013 IBM Corporation16 Case Study: Government of Alberta Not for DistributionSeptember 26, 2013 Background  Government wide initiative incorporating 24 ministries, to reduce expenditures while maintaining public services unchanged  Lack of integration among existing applications made data consolidation and reporting difficult, resulting in significant manual manipulation of outputs  Employs more than 35,000 – many of which were directly impacted by transforming human resource application delivery Business need  Primary objective was to increase availability and quality of information to support decision making in a timely and cost effective manner Solution approach  Implementation of PeopleSoft HR including access to employee information via an on-line 24/7 self-service portal  Manage operations of hardware infrastructure and provide application management services  Upgrade PeopleSoft HR to Version 9.0 incorporating bi- weekly payroll and self service time reporting Outcomes  Aligned to Government of Alberta strategic initiatives relating to creation of Shared Services and cost savings  Completed upgrade/transformation in less than 18 months  Significantly increased ability for most employees to have self-service access to their own employee information  Received high levels of performance and standards against service level agreements including the award of a Gold medal for Government transformation excellence. Lessons Learned 1.Service Provider SLA’s demonstrate better results when defined as outcome-based rather than flowing down the same SLA’s that the Shared Services organization provides to their clients. 2.Greater focus should be on organizational change management 3.Strong commitment from senior executives within the Government imperative to drive transformation
  17. 17. © 2013 IBM Corporation Case Study: IBM’s Finance Transformation 17
  18. 18. © 2013 IBM Corporation18 • Single source of truth – one ledger; one financial data warehouse; common definitions • Introduced global processes – owners responsible for technology and data quality • Created Centers of Excellence providing financial skills and standardized support What we did?Why? • IBM Finance was highly decentralized – a maze of systems • 14K finance employees was 2 times competition • High percent of time spent on administrative tasks • Lack of integration and unique measurement systems led to inconsistent data • Finance viewed as low value add Financial information strategy Common data definitions Common transaction applications Common ledgerLedger Acctg Consol Corporate Whse Fin'l Planning Geo Whse Employee Disbursements Intercompany Accounts Payable Assets Accounts Receivable Common data definitions and processes Corporate data standards-financial elements Single worldwide chart of accounts Finance lead client Common worldwide planning system Single worldwide financial information warehouse (FIW) Common geographic mega- centers Single worldwide consolidation system Business Mgmt. Info Treasury Mgmt. Info Common information IBM Financial systems built on commonality in support of an integrated management system Setting the stage for IBM’s Finance Transformation Case Study: IBM Finance Transformation  Vision and leadership  Corporate-wide strategy & architecture  Scale economies  Control of standards  Critical mass of skills  Units control priorities  BU's have ownership  Responsive  Excessive cost  No standards  Reinvention of wheel  No synergy or integration  Unresponsive  No BU ownership  No BU control Centralized Finance Decentralized Finance  Common Standards  Synergy IBM's Finance Model Transactions Decision Support September 26, 2013
  19. 19. © 2013 IBM Corporation19 ImpactHow we have evolved • Focused on the basics (’94 – ’98) – Standard / Common Process – Automation – Functional Best Practices – Financial Reporting • Integrated the Enterprise (’98 – ’02) – Shared Services – Web Enablement – Core Competency – Decision Support • Moved to globalization (’02 – present) – Process Outsourcing /Global COEs – Technology Exploitation – Rationalized ERP – Information On Demand • Optimized global capability – Increased use of global support from 12% in ’05 to 50% in ’12 • Shift to higher value work – Increased decision support work from 30% in ’94 to 70% in ’12 • Lowered expenses – Lowered expense to revenue share from 3% in ’94 to 1% in ’12 • Focused on employee development – New career paths inside and outside of Finance organization The results of transformation on the Finance Function Case Study: IBM Finance Transformation September 26, 2013
  20. 20. © 2013 IBM Corporation Becoming a Value Integrator  Predictive and forward-looking insights  Performance optimization  Automated production of key metrics  Analytics to enable self service  Business analysis and interpersonal skills to communicate, convince and influence  Build technologies and tools to support business analytics  Embed predictive capabilities into operational systems and processes  Invest in analytical and “consultative” skills development of employees – helping them become “trusted business advisors” IBM’s Finance Transformation continues to evolve Case Study: IBM Finance Transformation Skills Strategic Insight Quantitative Qualitative Core Leadership ConsultativeAnalytical Pulling Reports Performing Ledger entries Accounting Principles Reconciling Data Project Management Building Trust Data Modeling Trend Analysis Forecasting Statistical Techniques Packaging & Presenting Negotiating Problem Solving Listening Business Acumen Partnership Influencing Risk Management Invoicing Financial Concepts Insight Generation Change Management Scenario analysis Business Ethics Persuasive Communication Value Competence / Skill Level CompetitiveAdvantage Analysis – Why is this happening? Report – How many, how often, where? Gather Data – What happened? Administrative Trusted Advisor What‘s the best that can happen? Predictive – What will happen next? What’s next? How will we get there? 20
  21. 21. © 2013 IBM Corporation WW Process Ownership Common data Common ledger Common systems Centralization Shared Services 1994 Primary focus on Efficiency Value-driven Efficiency and Volume focus *Note: Prior years re-stated for mission transfers Transformation to date has shown steady saving from efficiency improvement, with future saving from value-driven efficiencies 21 September 26, 2013 IBM Transformations to Date Benefits Realization 2005* 2006* 2007* 2008* 2009* 2010 2011 2012 Est 2013 Est 2014 Est 2015 Est Spending Savings
  22. 22. © 2013 IBM Corporation22 Through these case studies and others alike, key Lessons Learned have emerged on Finance Transformation  Rumors and myths will develop - Be sure to communicate clearly and often  Implementation can be step wise, but early scope must be wide enough to deliver clear value  Delivering hard cost savings often means significant workforce impacts  The benefits are significant and are achievable  It takes more time and is more difficult to implement  Go faster than you think you will be able  Finance transformation is an effective road to cultural change  Sustained leadership trumps good project management  Neglect the people issues at your peril  Get governance right, but don’t hesitate to evolve governance as finance transformation matures  Political commitment comes with strategic alignment  Working horizontally does not come naturally in government – foster trust and collaboration September 26, 2013
  23. 23. © 2013 IBM CorporationFinance Operating Model Optimization | February 200923 Drive efficiency and effectiveness through common systems and scale economies Gain insights through incorporating risk into performance management and centers of competency Low Med High Maturity Timeline Providing and owning the single source of the truth Transformation Journey through Stages of Maturity Transformation Journey Integrate Finance through standards, enabled by global process ownership Source: IBM Global Business Services
  24. 24. © 2013 IBM Corporation<< Clie 24 Transformation is achieved through rigorous and thoughtful attention to the core building blocks The Journey to an Integrated Organization Low Medium High Timeline Legend - Actions Establish global standards Simplify Converge performance and risk management Strictly adhere to common data definitions enterprise- wide Implement a standard chart of accounts / standard information architecture enterprise-wide Use standardized common processes enterprise-wide Strictly adhere to global process ownership enterprise-wide Mandate and enforce global standards for all business units Use shared services for transactional activities Reduce the number of Finance applications & black book tools Establish Centers of Excellence for Core and Specialized Services Reduce the number of ERP instances Use centers of excellence for decision support Use outsourcing (for non- core activities) Conduct formalized risk identification that is institutionalized within the organization’s responsibilities Fully embed access / process controls in risk systems Use predictive analytics / modeling for measuring and monitoring risk Utilize risk as an economic evaluation tool Use risk adjusted forecast and plan  Formally incorporate risk indicators into performance monitoring  Use historical comparison of key risk and performance indicators  Conduct routine management monitoring & reporting that includes risk factors Through considerable manual effort Through greater efficiency and effectiveness Through the use of headlights (forward leaning insights) versus tail lights (historical) Providing and owning the single source of the truth
  25. 25. © 2013 IBM Corporation Successful Transformations are a Journey with Common Key Elements Transformation has been, and is, an Evolutionary process…  Standardizing Data and Systems  Reengineering Common Global Processes  Consolidating Core Functions into Shared Services  Globalizing / Nationalizing Centers of Excellence  Implementing and Promoting Self- Service  Exploiting Business Analytics 25 September 26, 2013 Transformation requires…  Strong executive support  Clear Vision, targets and measurable objectives  Continuous effort – need to dedicate resources to get results  To look at Data, Processes and Tools and balance across all three with a focus on the cost of delivery  Communicate, communicate, communicate…
  26. 26. © 2013 IBM Corporation Thank You September 26, 201326

×