The Quick Fix? … Or the Whole Enchilada?

P1150501-002

Managers need information; that’s one of the laws of nature. The uses of information are endless, and managers constantly come up with new needs for reports, analyses and procedures. But information comes at a cost. The cost may be easy to calculate, as in the case of development hours required, or it may be an opportunity cost trade-off with the company’s other priorities.

Weighing Priorities

Whenever you have a need for information, here are the questions you’ll be asked:

1. How badly do you need it?
2. How soon do you need it?
3. If we can’t give you everything you need, what can you live with?
4. What are the projected cost savings or revenue increases?
5. What is the cost of getting the information?

Large organizations have developed sophisticated processes to allocate information resources among competing priorities, often involving some sort of ROI analysis. People do tend to exaggerate, though, so the objectivity and precision of the process comes under suspicion. Smaller companies, in my experience, tend to admit that they use more subjective methods to evaluate priorities.

The result is pretty much the same, though. Unless you have a critical need, such as compliance with a new accounting policy, a new line of business or an actual system breakdown…

You’re going to have to wait. Maybe forever.

The Quick Fix

The alternative to waiting for an exciting new series of reports and procedures, reconciled, actionable and fully integrated with all existing systems is the Quick Fix. This may be a compromise resulting from the answer to Question 3 above, or you may have to take matters into your own hands.

The Quick Fix is usually inexpensive, fast and gives you most of what you need. It can be a viable alternative to waiting for an entire new application to emerge from the murky dungeons of the development process. Or it can get you started on a new initiative without waiting for months, even years, to get the Whole Enchilada.

The Quick Fix isn’t always the right answer, though. Here are some situations I’ve observed over the years.

A Retailer

As CFO of a retailer, we received systems support from the specialty stores division of the internationally known parent company. The problem was that the specialty stores division was a shoe company, and we were a fashion apparel company. Many important issues needed to be resolved to customize the systems so our merchandisers could conduct business. So it was no surprise that when the accountants had a serious problem calculating Gross Profit and Inventory, we were sent to the back of the line, and told to wait.

For a small fee, we hired a programmer to develop a custom report that not only gave us reliable Gross Profit and Inventory results, but also provided the merchandisers with a clear picture of their operating results. It only took an hour or two a month to update the program, so the Quick Fix became a satisfactory permanent solution.

Some years later, a senior executive of the parent company saw our report, and ordered it installed in all the other operating companies. The systems development people jumped on it, and rolled it out to the entire company with great fanfare. But we just shrugged our shoulders… there was no need for the Whole Enchilada.

Real Estate Services

A real estate services company had passed the level of revenues that required them to change their tax accounting from the cash method to the accrual method. They recently asked me to help them make the transition.

The company had grown rapidly, but was still using Quick Books as its accounting system. It was certainly time for an upgrade, and the accounting conversion made it a perfect time to make the change. The only problem was that it would take months of time, and a substantial cash investment to research, purchase and install a new accounting package, and to integrate it with the business operations system. Meanwhile, the tax filing deadline was coming up fast.

My first suggestion was the Quick Fix. I suggested they continue using the methods the accounting staff were used to, and just make journal entries at the end of each month to adjust to accrual accounting. The CEO, however, wanted a deeper change, including a daily reconciliation to the output of their highly sophisticated operating system.

The situation clearly called for the Whole Enchilada, but timing was such that we needed a transitional Quick Fix to meet reporting requirements, and to fill in the gaps while we studied a fully integrated system overhaul.

I reviewed the business operating system, and found it to be sufficiently reliable to use its output as the source of accounting entries. The problem was that there were no accounting cutoffs or similar checks and balances for reconciliation, so I worked with the programmers to develop daily reports that verified the integrity of the data.

As a result of the project, management realized they needed to increase the sophistication of their financial department, and hired an experienced controller. I’m looking forward to hearing how they ultimately proceed.

A Homebuilder

A homebuilder had developed an elaborate and sophisticated construction management system, and its reporting mechanism was tied to an accounting package. Oddly enough, they also continued to maintain the original general ledger system that dated back to the 1970s. The problem was that the two systems generated very different information, and the senior managers each had favorite reports that didn’t agree with those used by other managers. Massive amounts of time were wasted in meetings, and one vice president spent most of his time reconciling the divergent reports. Needless to say, accounting was a nightmare.

The CEO had been instrumental in developing both systems, and was unwilling to see the need for change. The Quick Fix was practiced on a daily basis, but by the time the results were available, it was often too late to act on the information. An irreverent senior executive used an automotive metaphor, suggesting that when you opened the hood, the engine was run by squirrels on a treadmill.

The situation was crying out for the Whole Enchilada, and the Quick Fix just wasn’t working. Yes, the company went bankrupt.

A Land Developer

When I arrived for my first day as CFO of a land developer, I asked the controller for the most recent financial statements. “What do you mean?” she asked. That was the first sign of trouble. I soon learned that we had land on the books that we didn’t own, just as we owned land that wasn’t on the books. It was the same thing with loans and other assets and liabilities. In an organization with over 60 different companies, each with its own separate equity and debt financing, this was intolerable.

There was no Quick Fix to be found, so we shortly purchased a well-known industry-specific accounting package, and herded the numbers into their proper places.

The Whole Enchilada was the only option.

How does your company weigh the costs and benefits of implementing the Quick Fix or the Whole Enchilada?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s