Tag: CFO

The Second Quarter Financial Results, or They Always Kill the Messengers


 

Segmental Profitability

© Copyright 2011 E and D CC, Inc.

Believe it or not, but we've already passed the mid-point of 2012.  While the foretold Armageddon is not upon us just yet (most likely due to the inaccuracy of our calendar), the immediate future of many CFOs can be predicted with a confident certainty: the second quarter financial results will be due in a couple of weeks.

Let's face it, this was not an easy fiscal period.  Whether large or small, businesses were affected by the volatility of the international markets, the slowdown of commercial demand, plunges in both commodities' prices and consumer confidence.  Even the bigwigs at Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, the conjurors of "facts" that prevent trading markets from falling apart, had to admit today that "the recovery slowed in the second quarter" and downgrade their projections.  

What recovery, you clowns?  Anyway, those of us running actual businesses know: the quarter was mostly downsloping, choppy, and unhealthy.  This will translate into smaller revenues, narrower profit margins, and, for many, losses. 

The Frustrated CFO always feels doubly agitated about subpar performance results (obviously, antsy enough to talk about herself in the third person).  On a big-scale, as a small-business crusader, I am worried that with every difficult fiscal quarter the possibility of our economy getting back on the right track, with entrepreneurship reclaiming its rightful status as a backbone of capitalism, becomes less and less real.

And then there is an apprehension of inevitable consequences for all financial chiefs of privately-held companies (myself including), who cannot avoid playing the part of the bad-news heralds. 

Regardless of the nature and the size of a company, the main recipients of its performance results are owners/investors.  For public companies these are millions of faceless institutional and individual stock-market gamblers.  The publication of financial information by these companies is mandated by law and governed by SEC.  

When the picture is bleak, the Boards of Directors, terrified by the possibility of a sell-off and devalue of the stock (first and foremost, their own holdings), frequently spring into action to show the world that they are "doing something about it."  This usually amounts to moving the pawns on the corporate chessboard: we regularly hear about dismissals of CEOs and COOs perceived to be responsible for the failures.  At the same time, unless they are caught together with their auditors cooking the books, the big-time CFOs are rarely publicly flogged. 

Private businesses operate in an entirely different universe.  Here, people responsible for financial reporting, CFOs and Controllers, daily face their owners/investors.  The entire chain of  delivering the message is reduced to a single step.  Here you are with your perfectly accurate, yet unpleasant, reports and there, on the other side of the table, or on the other end of an email link, are the owners/executives. 

And, even though everyone in the room understands that you cannot possibly be singly responsible for the business's poor performance; that it is a result of many contributing factors; that the CEO herself disregarded your loud warnings and fucked up several crucial deals – the bosses invariably follow their first impulse to lash out against somebody.  At that initial moment of disappointment, there is no better a scapegoat than you, the news-bearer.  As if on cue, the bosses turn into cranky babies  and throw pointless tantrums.  The funniest thing that ever happened to me was when the President wanted to see the general ledger details and "check the numbers." 

Eventually, of course, they come down, and become reasonable.  If you've earned their respect and got their ear, they would listen to your analysis and accept your improvements proposals.  The thing is, though, we are human too and no matter how well we hold it together, the hurt of that initial heraldic punishments stays with us.

Queen's Herald

The Queen's Herald

In Defense of Business Owners: Scope of Responsibility


Many of my fellow small business CFOs and Controllers mistake my singling out a BOSS as one of the main frustration triggers for an ardent enmity towards business owners.  The truth is quite opposite.  As the matter of fact, most of the time I find myself on the same side as my boss; shoulder to shoulder, fighting the daily war of commercial survival. 

Yes, it’s tough to deal with their complex of unlimited powers.  At the same time, I always say that business owners create our jobs and that alone merits respect.  I also never imply that all CFOs and Controllers are made equal.  I’ve met plenty of inadequate, limited, lazy and dangerously indifferent financial execs who damaged the companies they were supposed to guard.  In due time I’ll write about them as well.

But we interact with out bosses more than anybody else and that’s why they are prominently featured in my posts.  Being a CFO or a Controller makes it inevitable that everything a CEO does or doesn’t do becomes a concern and frequently a touchy subject. 

And one of the touchiest subjects is the Scope of Responsibility.  I cannot even count how many CFOs and Controllers have complained to me over the years about perceived imbalance between their scope of responsibility and that of their bosses.  

This disconcert derives from two sources.  First of all, it’s the much-discussed here overwhelming multitasking of the senior financial management.
Secondly, it’s the confusion about what exactly the Scope of Responsibility is.  Even though the position’s breadth of influence on the business is important, it is not just the number of tasks and duties you perform.   The key factor is the depth of the impact executive decisions make on the company’s future.  

The way I always looked at it is as follows.  If you are fortunate to work for a brilliant entrepreneur who, given sufficient time and support, is capable of generating ideas that will ensure your company’s prosperity and growth, that should be his ONLY task.  I consider it my job then to take away from him all functions I can handle myself in order to free him for what he does best.  I don’t let bankers or vendors bother him; I don’t allow him to fiddle with numbers; I don’t ask him to learn the operational system.  As the matter of fact, I prefer them not even know Excel.  All I want them to do is to create business strategies, network, establish new commercial relationships.

Let me leave you with this simile of sorts.  Radiohead’s frontman Thom Yorke cannot read sheet music (neither does Sir Paul McCartney, by the way).  His musically educated multi-instrumentalist  band-mate Johnny Greenwood have been deliberately resisting for 25 years now to teach Thom any musical grammar out of fear that it may diminish Yorke’s creativity.  That’s a great executive support strategy.

And let me tell you: I’ve been to multiple Radiohead concerts through the years and I wouldn’t change anything about Thom Yorke. Nothing at all.


 
  

 

 

 

   

Quote of the Week: Intellectual CEO


Images-1From an actual email exchange:

CEO:    That paragraph I added to your proposal earlier – I don't think it was necessary.  Please, delete it.

CFO:    Ah, editing yourself now.  Will do.

CEO:    Perfection remains elusive.  All we can do is struggle onwards in our Sisyphean attempts.

CFO:    Tell me about it!  I've been pushing that rock since I was born, but the damn thing keeps rolling down.

Overhead! – Every CEO’s First Response to Subpar Performance Results


Profit DropOf course, it would be obnoxious to generalize my observations to include the entire class of business owners and chief executives (maybe they are not all the same), but every single CEO, with whom I've ever dealt, displayed the same behavioral pattern at the first sound of "bad news."

It's one of the most unpleasant experiences many financial professionals go through from time to time. The fiscal period (month, quarter, year) is closed and you look at the bottom line that is way below the company's target, or worse – the numbers are in red. You cannot help feeling singly responsible, simply because you are the first person to stare in the face of this unfortunate reality.

Yet, while it's true that a holistic CFO, the rightful member of an executive team, shares the P&L responsibility with the rest of the decision-making crew, unless she uses extravagantly expensive capital resources, her direct responsibility for the poor performance is highly unlikely. In fact, she probably anticipated this outcome and was doing everything in her power to prevent it: fought for better informed procurement decisions, higher efficiency, sensible distribution methodology, more selective sales, and so on.

Nevertheless, here are the results. The gross profit is too low, eaten away by sub-par sales. Some of new products couldn't make any money at all due to the lack of marketing and distribution efforts. There is a delinquent debt write-off on an account blessed by the boss for open terms. All these operational losses that you tried so hard to thwart.

And now it's time to present the results to the CEO. Frustrated by the company's poor performance, worrying about the impact the loss may have on the cash-flow, formulating the bullshit you will have to feed to the bankers to spin the disappointing news, you go through the established reporting protocol, whatever it is in you company: KPI tables, graphic dashboards, formal financial statements. As I said, in my experience the delivery of the news causes the same reaction: "We have to reduce our OVERHEAD!!!"

Overhead? We've kept our general and administrative expenses (G&A) stable for years! While we doubled our volume (triple, quadruple – whatever is your case), we managed to do so with a mere 10% increase in non-operating expenses. It's the gross margin we should be discussing. Alas, your reasonable arguments will break against the wall of stubborn conviction that overhead is the source of all evil.

Afterwards, the useless exercise of scrutinizing every single category of G&A will commence. You will have very expensive meetings with highly paid executive staff, including yourself, devoting their valuable time to discussions of $5,000 monthly Federal Express charges and $500 spent on various subscriptions. While you do that, another transaction bound to lose $250,000 will materialize, and then another, and another…

Why does it always happen like this? The answer is simple: only a handful of people are capable of facing their own failures without flinching away. It is very difficult for chief execs , who are frequently involved in operational management, sales, and business development, to admit that they don't really handle their side of the business too well. So, instead of dissecting the real causes, they jump on something they rarely control. And it's really funny, because a significant portion of the overhead is created by them. You know – travel, dinners, drinks, limos, perks, etc.

Audit Season Woes


As a corporate controller, CFO, and consultant, I've been on auditees' side of the table for the past 20 years. Yet, I still remember the gratifying excitement of coming to a company as an auditor and testing the depth of my expert knowledge in an unfamiliar territory, quickly absorbing the business's specifics and immediately identifying the scope of testing. Well, Ok, I've been called a "show-off" and "know-it-all" many times, so forget me. Over the years, there were other public accounting professionals (not many, but some), who impressed me with their knowledge and sharpness, but it doesn't happen anymore.

I've been complaining about the decline of the quality of work across all jobs, from customer service representatives on the phone to the cardiologists in fancy hospitals, for years. But somehow I still get very frustrated when I encounter the same trend in my own profession. I cannot even explain why. After all, I am very conscious of the managerial accountants' limitations. The main reason for writing "CFO Techniques" was the desire to fill their knowledge gaps. Just a few weeks ago I wrote about The Unimaginable Abyss of Accounting Ignorance in the small-business environment. So, I should not be surprised when I am faced with the same situation while dealing with financial auditors. Nevertheless, it still gets me.

It's audit season, so in the past couple of weeks I've been helping my client (a young company) to go through their very first independent year-end examination of books and records. It's conducted by a small CPA firm hired before my consulting engagement commenced.

Under my guidance, the client's accountants did what I always advise to do in preparation for an audit (see Chapter 30, What Guarantees Fast and Painless Audit, in "CFO Techniques"), i.e. they loaded the appointed auditor in advance with statements and schedules of data required to make all testing decisions. He definitely had time to prepare well.

The client is an importer of raw materials. So, the revenue/cost recognition and cut-off tests are very important. Accordingly, the auditor gives a list of sales and purchases he wants to test. We provide all supporting documents to verify the propriety and accuracy of each transaction. After a little while the auditor knocks on my door with a bunch of papers in his hands. "How do I know," he asks timidly, "if these invoices have correct dates?"

Inside my head I scream, "Are you fucking kidding me?" But this is not about my frustration, this is about my client. So, I calmly explain that he needs to compare the recording dates with the source documents proving the product's ownership transfer as defined by Incoterms. I go further and demonstrate with one of the selected items: this sales order states CIF (cost, insurance, freight), which means that the customer owns the product as soon as it's loaded on the transport; hence, your source document is the Bill of Lading (BL) attached right here to the Commercial Invoice and the Packing List; the BL's date is the sale's date.

He soon comes back with another file and he is very apologetic, "I am sorry, could you explain this to me again? I never heard of those… terms… before. What did you call them?" I help him out, "Incoterms?"

Will somebody, please, explain to me, since when it's Ok for an auditor, who is responsible to lenders, investors, and other outside users to verify the correctness of books and records, to come to the client without the full knowledge required to perform his tasks? Why is he not even embarrassed to admit that? Why the hell in 2012 it did not occur to him to get his ass onto the world wide web, as soon as he heard the word "Incoterms" from me, and study them?

I guess, that would be too much to ask. Hey, he didn't even know what a "metric ton" was and asked me for the ton-to-pound conversion ratio instead of finding it by himself. He continued coming over, I continued providing him with definitions and rules. At some point he got so comfortable with this teacher-student setup, he even asked my advice on how to "test for prepaid expenses." Seriously? Did he forget that I was their from the client's side, essentially being audited?

And here I have to bring up my book again. There is Chapter 29 in "CFO Techniques" called Choose Your Auditors Wisely… Dear business owners, CEOs, CFOs, and controllers, please, read it if you want to avoid paying $25,000 – $100,000 (average range for small businesses) for low-quality accounting services.