Denna presentation hölls på IBM Business Connect (http://www.ibm.com/se/businessconnect) i oktober 2015 av Olivier Bonomini (Head of Business Engineering, EF), Martin Zehnder (Vice President Financial Analysis & Systems, EF) Beskrivning: Learn how EF has gained unprecedented control over and insight into its finances with IBM Analytics solutions. Standardization increases trust in plans and metrics, and saves time on financial planning. EF can now also price its offerings more flexibly for each market, making them more appealing to more students. EF Education First is an international education company that offers a wide range of educational programs in more than 50 countries.

1. About EF
EF Education First was founded in
Sweden in 1965 by a young entrepreneur
named Bertil Hult. The concept was
straightforward: take local high school
students to England to learn English. It
was a simple business idea—on-site
language and cultural studies—but one
with an enormous future.

2. Opening the World through Education
EF Education First is an international education company focusing
on language, academics, and cultural experience.
50+
Countries with
EF operations
40K 500 1
EF staff, educators
& Tour Directors
EF schools
& offices
Global mission

3. Olivier M. Bonomini
Head of Business Engineering
EF Group
Based in Zurich / Switzerland
Previous Roles:
Financial System Manager, EF
Financial Manager, EF
Martin N. Zehnder
Vice President Financial Analysis & Systems
EF Language
Based in Zurich / Switzerland
Previous Roles:
VP Planning & Strategy APP, EF
Manager Controlling & Reporting, DHL Switzerland (Logistics)
Senior Business Analyst, The Nuance Group Europe (Airport Retail)
Presenters

4. Challenges
• Time consumption of budgeting process
• Number of versions and files
• Data storage
• Updates and modifications of models and processes

5. Organization and Requirements
Flat hierarchy/Growing business
=> segregated ownership
=> detailed budget structure
=> complexity
Flexibility <> Standardization <> Maintainability <> Simplicity

6. TM1 solution:
• Internet platform (one version, flexible
structure)
• Fast calculation performance
• Completeness/Rules set
• Integrated workflow (distribution, email,
reminders, approval)
• Security (Very detailed plus window login)
• Consolidation automatically
• Historical data flexible, drill through and down
• More flexibility create reports/
comparisons/modifications
• Forecast/Scenarios calculations possible
• Newest Actual vs. budget comparison
available at any time, no preparation
• High integration with the systems level, data
stored in database
Excel model vs TM1
Excel template solution:
• Excel files (version, static structure)
• Slow calculation performance (large models)
• Completeness/Rules, changes
• Workflow management (distribution,
collection, email)
• Security not ideal, not flexible
• Consolidation manually
• Historical data pre-set and limited
• Reports/comparisons/modifications
cumbersome to implement (fixed model)
• Forecast/Scenarios limited (amount of data)
• Actual vs. budget comparison on request,
preparation time consuming
• Low integration with the systems, data stored
in files

7. Source
Complexity
Envisioned Development Direction
TM1
• Sales
• Production
• Allocations
• Pricing Processing
• Dynamic Analysis
• Other Financial
Support Processes
Analysis
Opportunity
Efforts
+ =

8. Implementation / Development
• Analysis of the business models and excel solutions
• Conversion /Implementation by module and division
• Interlinking of parallel processes
• Enhancement of functionalities
• Training with the stake holders
Analysis /
Modelling
Implementation
/ Testing
Training /
Instructions
Compilation /
Feedback

9. Current model
• 800 users in 5 divisions with 20 different designations
• P/L forecasting
• Actuals vs. budget
• Workflow with email notifications
• Allocations (cross division, cross module)
• Pricing (including competitor analysis)
• Scenarios analysis (e.g. sales patterns)

10. Overview

11. Completeness

12. Interconnection - Impact

13. Flexibility

14. Challenges and successes
• Mirror the business model
• Flexibility vs. standardization
• Improved the data quality
• Completeness
• Shortened compilation time of reporting
• Analyses time
• New results available for business decisions