Tag: Controllers

CFO Folklore: The Home Front


Images-1 I touch on the gender inequality among financial execs once in a while – an obligatory topic for a female CFO/author/blogger.  I mean, everyone writes about it.  Entire institutions and organizations compile sociological studies dealing with these issues.  None of it seems to be creating any changing momentum, but hey, at least someone is willing to pay the researchers their salaries. 

The interesting thing, though, that most of the time these topics (including my earlier posts) deal with the social, rather than practical, aspects of the phenomenon.  People talk about advancement rates, compensation levels, female-to-male executives proportions, etc.  In a very scientific way, we say: all things being equal (education, achievements, intelligence, etc.), women still don't get a fair shake.   And nobody talks about the fact that, on a practical level, things are never equal between men and women, who strive for, or already achieved, top job positions.

First of all, women by nature are more conscientious and responsible than men.  That is why we have higher percentage of female straight "A" students both in high schools and colleges (yet, there are more male valedictorians!).  Secondly, women know only too well that they are at disadvantage due to the simple fact that they are not men.  That makes them work ten times harder than any man in their position would.  So, in truth they get rewarded at lower rates not for the equally good work, but for the job done much better.

But the biggest practical inequality occurs on the executive's home front.  I remember having a friendly airplane conversation with my CEO, on our way to a meeting in Germany.  At one point he said that I was the hardest working person he knew besides him – he honestly believed that he worked as hard as I did.  Of course, he was talking about the job itself.  Well, I thought that even at that I worked much harder (I did not take Friday's off during summers), but I chose to turn to more obvious facts of life.

I asked, " Who prepares your suit, shirt and tie for tomorrow every evening?"  "My wife," he said.  "We frequently work until 9 or 10 pm, is the dinner ready, when you come home?" "Yes."  "Who writes checks?  Who deals with repairmen?  Who talks to teachers?  Who buys groceries? Who takes kids to the doctors'?"  "The wife" was the answer to all the questions.  "Now, who do you think does all that in my home?"  

He knew the answer, of course.  So, every day I was working my executive job, let's say, just as hard as he did, plus his wife's job.  And that's true for most of female CFOs, whether married or single, with or without children. 

Look, how many unmarried male CFOs or Controllers you know?  I don't know any.  Even if their wives leave them, they get remarried very quickly – someone needs to take care of the home front.

On the other hand, a woman expected either to give up her personal life for the career, or hide it away, as if she does not have any.  It is especially true for those female executives who work in small and midsize companies – the salaries are not large enough to afford a Mr. Mom of a husband.  So, we are talking inequality cubed: the majority of women work harder, plus cover the home front (or give up life outside of the job), and still get paid and promoted on a much smaller scale. 

Here is the funny part.  At the end my boss asked, "How come you still read more than I do and go to the theater all the time?"  "Because I don't sleep," I answered.

Job Search: Out of Work for a Long Time


The media, politicians and economists are trying to convince everyone that recession has ended many months ago.  Well, good for recession, but from what I observe, a lot of folks are out of work.  There have to be a reason why unemployment benefits are extended up to 72 weeks in most states. 

Let's face it, the "employment gaps" are far longer now than they have been in many years.  It is especially true for CFO's and Controllers whose small and mid-size employers went out of business or contracted to the level of not being able to afford senior management.  Even though I never believed the old recruitment fable that every $10K of your desired compensation translates into one month of job hunting, the basic rules of statistics prove that it takes longer to find a high level position simply because there are less of them.  Now the available openings are further reduced by the economic contraction.  There are government aid packages designed specifically to stimulate hiring by small businesses, but it will take long time before we will see significant impact.

Knowing all that, nevertheless, does not prevent recruiters and HR managers from asking you point blank, "Why you have been out of work for such a long time?"  They know why.  They ask because they want to see how you handle the question.  Your ability to present yourself in the best light during an interview and explain the employment gap on your resume in the most appealing way is a very sensitive issue.

That is why I highly recommend that everyone, even those who are not actively looking at the moment, read The Ladders' article Why Have You Been out of Work So Long?

I don't always agree with their material, but what I like about The Ladders' advice pieces is that they give us the point of view of the hiring professionals, the very people on the other side of the table.   Those on the job market need to cater to their expectations and their mind-set.  This particular article has the most straight-forward advice on the employment gap issue I have ever seen.

I have to say, however, that almost until the end they got me worried because it seemed that the article practically recommended to make up a story to fill the gap: say whatever,  except that you were just looking for a job.  Only in the last paragraph the actual activities are implied.

And I would like to elaborate on that.  Please, don't make up stories – you never know where that may lead you.  Nobody looks for a job for 12 hours every day.  So, use your spare time to occupy yourself with one of those recommended activities, and then you can tell people about them.  Even if you buy a SOX manual and study it on your own, you can say that you have significantly expanded your internal control compliance horizons.


              

New CFO’s Essential Knowledge Prerequisites


When you start as a CFO, the first thing to do is to get your bearings – to assess your position relative to your surroundings.  As quickly as you can you must grasp general ideas about typical characteristics of your environment, your own role and purpose, expectations of others, as well as primary routes for channeling your talents and efforts.  But as soon as you are done with that, comes the time to get down to the level of firsthand details and study the specific aspects of the business.   You need to draw a detailed map that will help you on your journey as a financial leader.

This is a mandatory activity for a recently hired head of finance, new to the company.  It is a good idea for someone who has been with the company for a while in a lower position and just been promoted – new vantage point may provide you with the better vision of your company.  Even if you’ve held the top post for a few years, but never got around to do this and feel that incomplete picture prevents you from excelling, maybe now is a good time to go back to the drawing board.

This is your R&D stage, necessary for proper functional design.  Your research will help you to improve future performance.  Every CFO and controller must acquire an exhaustive understanding of his employer’s business. There is no doubt, that compilation of, what I call, the big picture is the key element in your strategic responsibilities. However, it is just as important for day-to-day hands-on management.  In the absence of thorough knowledge of all operational and organizational features, it is impossible to construct budgets, define tasks, or determine reporting requirements.

At the very least, your information-gathering activities should be focused in the following four areas:

Study of Corporate Structure

Economic complexity pushes businesses into multiple levels of diversification – wider product ranges, additional services, new geographical and demographic markets, related industries, outsourcing, foreign productions, etc, etc.  As companies pave new ways, their corporate structures adapt accordingly: branches are created, subsidiaries are formed, and satellite offices are opened.  Today, a $10 million service company may turned out to be a surprisingly complicated organism.  This affects nearly every accounting and financial function: local taxation, inter-company transactions, principles of consolidation, financial statements disclosures, banking facilities – just to name a few.

Study of Operational Flow and Value Chain

During your orientation stage this study has immediate practical applications.  It is a prerequisite to identifying accounting cycles, classifying assets and liabilities, pinpointing cost centers, determining analytical and financing needs, etc., etc.  There are transactions happening at every stage of the operational flow that give rise to accounting events.  Without full comprehension of the value chain you run a danger of oversights and errors.

Study of Organizational Chart and Functional Distribution

If the previous section is about processes, in this one we survey people and their positions.  I don’t have to convince anybody that it is important to figure out the chain of command and designation of responsibilities within your employer’s organization – you just need to know who’s who.  It goes beyond just knowing your peers with whom you discuss company-wide issues and inter-departmental relationships.  You have to know people along the value chain – those, who are in charge of cost and profit centers, have relationships with suppliers, vendors and customers, maintain your facilities and receive your mail.   

Study of Existing Policies and Procedures

If you became a CFO or a controller in a company that already has policies in writing and documented procedures in place, even if they are deficient, consider yourself very lucky.  You can study the existing papers, outline blind spots and pinpoint weak or erroneous steps. It is easier to enforce changes, if employees are already comfortable with an idea of adhering to a recorded set of rules.

On the other hand, you must be prepared to deal with a complete lack of anything in writing.  Important thing to remember is that it does not mean policies and procedures don’t exist.  They are there like an oral folklore of an ancient tribe, passed from generation to generation.  It would be a big mistake just to ignore the traditions and try to impose a new order.  You have to uncover and learn them first.   

Excerpted from my forthcoming book "CFO Techniques: A Hands-on Guide to Keeping Your Business Solvent and Successful" (Apress, December 2011)

CFO’s Performance Focus


I frequently talk about psychological trends and general attitude patterns in a broad sort of sense.  Yes, large groups of people share similar traits due to comparability of their backgrounds, environments, occupational qualifications, etc.  The very reason I write for the audience of financial professionals is because I believe that our experiences have common points and the topics would be understood and accepted; that our expert qualities unite us; that metaphorically speaking we all "have been in each other shoes."  I write about our bosses, small business owners, entrepreneurs as a group of people with very strong and easily recognizable idiosyncrasies.  But I never go too far with it.  I acknowledge and value individuality and uniqueness of each person and each situation.  That is why sometimes I describe experiences of specific people, including my own.

This separates me from organizational behaviorists, especially those who popularize their science for digestion by the masses.  In their zealous attempt to fit the entire universe into a simplistic, easily explainable system, they go as far as dividing everything and everyone into 3-4 categories.  And so, they manage to divide all possible motivations, intentions and impulses that guide employees' task performance focus, into just four categories (they even claim that it applies to "any given situation"):

(1) getting the job finished, which supposedly results in speeding up, being aggressive, and careless;

(2) getting the job right, which translates, according to this theory, into nearly OCD-ish fear of making a mistake and slows people down – they are just checking and re-checking everything over and over again;

Note that these two categories are placed on the opposite sides of the matrix.

(3) get along with people – I cannot offer any comments on this motivation nor its behavioral interpretations.  Honestly, I don't know what the hell is that all about;

(4) be appreciated – Ah, this one all executives understand very well, that's what we strive for.   But why is it associated with "being heard, being assertive, contribute to others;" moreover, why is it separated from 1 and/or 2?

This is laughable!  I don't know what kind of subject group the scientists studied to draw these conclusions.   Maybe these are just empirical deductions.  Then, how many personal observations were accumulated to form these opinions?  One thing I can say for sure  – they are definitely not based on hard-working financial professionals like us – CFOs, Controllers, VPs of small and mid-size businesses. There is no possibility for us of separating "getting it done" and "getting it right."  You don't become a CFO by accomplishing either one or another. 

And it has nothing to do with the time frame, as some suggest.  Other humans maybe can switch between the two, depending on how much time they have on their hands.  Us?  We live under constant pressure to get everything done yesterday and there is no room for errors.  Of course, the good news is that if you are for real, if your expertise is not phony, if you got where you are through hard work and exceptional abilities, you cannot do it any other way.  Your qualities and professionalism carry you through and that how you get to be appreciated.  All at the same time!        

CFO Folklore: Segmental Performance Analysis


SegRep #1 Regardless of whether your company is large or small, rich in cash or eke out its survival on a tight cash flow, operate with the most sophisticated custom-designed ERP fitted with Cognos or makes do with QuickBooks/Excel combo, if I ask you to pinpoint the exact segments where you lose or make money, most likely the answer is too broad, or intuitive, or incorrect.

Based on my experience, segmental performance is one of the most deficient areas of business analysis.  Ok, the larger are probably doing better than the small ones.  The latter, unfortunately, are clueless 99% of the time.

Then again, what is your segment?  Do we need the Large Hadron Collider to break the business matter into invisible particles?  Of course not, but a sensible breakdown can give an invaluable insight and bring about organizational changes.  And let me clarify that when I talk about "performance," I don't mean revenues, which are easy to track, I am talking about EBITDA – my favorite indicator.     

Familiar to everyone example – CBS Corporation.  Its portfolio consists of 23 separate brands (subsidiaries), including CBS Television, CBS News, CW, Showtime, Simon & Schuster, etc.  Of course, there are separate P&L's for each of these sub-entities. I am positive, Showtime Networks knows who does better Showtime or The Movie Channel.  I am pretty sure they are aware of how much "Dexter," or "Nurse Jackie" contribute to the bottom line.  Moreover, thanks to digital counting of viewers tuned in, they know for a fact how much Gross Revenue each episode generates.  As I said, that's easy – they know how much they get paid for each subscriber.  (Side Note: it's just as easy for the network television, where the revenue is calculated based on the commercial time).

But do they know how much profit (or loss) they make from each episode?  ALL costs allocated, including CBS Corporation CEO's salary?  What, it is not required by financial statements?  We are not talking about  them.  We are talking about magerial understanding of the business.  Is it important?  It's fundamentally important.  Each episode is written by different writers, directed by different directors, some use more effects and extras than others, etc., etc.  This is BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE and those are factors impacting this particular business.   

Here is promised CFO Folklore.  At some point in my career, I accepted a position in a company with national exposure – 14 operational facilities in different states.  They needed me because they couldn't understand why they experienced cash flow shoratges.  The first thing I did was the profitability analysis for each of the locations.  I uncovered that 9 out of 14, have been consistently loosing money for the past 18 months.  

There are, however, inherent difficulties that prevent most financial executives with limited human resources from undertaking this exercise.  First of all, it is not easy to properly define your segments.  It is pretty much a game of optimization between the level of details you would like to have and the resouces you need to achieve it.  The most intense part of the analysis, however, is the selection of proper principles of allocation for all shared costs and the allocation process itself.     

The spreadsheet image is courtersy of E&D CC, Inc.  If you are looking for help with segmental analysis, I recommend  contacting E&D CC – they specialize in assessing reporting needs and designing specific analytical tools related to profitability and costs, as well as budgetary, treasury, viability, forecasting and planning instruments: mzosya.edcc@gmai.com