Can business schools teach globalization?

It's always been the goal of MBA programs to offer relevant education that aligns with real world demands.  With the increased emphasis on globalization, MBA programs have tailored their programs to provide a stronger understanding of globalization.  But just how effective have these programs been in adapting to real world globalization issues?

The Wall Street Journal conducted an interview with Pankaj Ghemawat, a professor of global strategy at the IESE business school in Barcelona, Spain.  His central premise is that schools need to do a better job of explaining, not only the opportunities of globalization, but also the limits.  He points out that the common perception is that globalization is much further along than it really is.  The world is getting flatter, but it's not nearly as flat as people think it is.

Another point made by Professor Ghemawat is that more MBA programs are incorporating trips into their program to expose students to other cultures.  But how much can really be assimilated in a one or two week trip to another country?  Can it impose the illusion of understanding which could actually be damaging to students understanding of globalization?

These are relevant questions for finance organizations that are recruiting from MBA programs.  What skills should a finance organization expect from new recruits?  What additional training is required to develop a mature understanding of the opportunities and limits of globalization?  In subsequent posts I'll discuss my thoughts on what finance organizations can do to develop global competencies, not just with newly hired MBAs but with their global organization.

It's an interesting read and you can catch the entire interview at Can Globalization be Taught in B-School?

Unilever partners with Capgemini to enhance global service delivery for finance and accounting

As finance organizations continue their quest to build global delivery capabilities, some companies are leveraging the networked organizational model.  In this archetype, companies partner with 3rd party service providers to provide capabilities that provides services that would be difficult to replicate in-house. An example is the recently announced deal between Unilever and Capgemini to provide finance and accounting services to 130 countries.  An excerpt from the press release:

Paris, 19 December 2012 – Capgemini, one of the world’s foremost consulting, technology and outsourcing services providers has been selected by Unilever, one of the world’s leading consumer goods companies, as one of its global Strategic Suppliers under its ‘Partner to Win’ programme. Capgemini has also been awarded a more than €100 million five-year outsourcing contract for Unilever continuing its seven-year relationship delivering Unilever’s Southern Hemisphere Record to Report operations, global intercompany processes, as well as Access Control and Reporting & Monitoring globally.

Outsourcing a substantial portion of a finance organization is not for every company.  It takes a huge cultural shift to move in that direction.  However, for companies like Unilever, it enables them to create a more effective global delivery network for finance while enabling them to focus on their core business.

You can read the entire press release at: Capgemini signs a new Finance & Accounting outsourcing contract with Unilever.

Supporting Finance Transformation Post Go-Live

In 2012 I created a series of posts around Finance Transformation Gone Wrong, and the ways that transformation leaders and teams can avoid those pitfalls.  Hopefully you've had a chance to incorporate that thinking into your own transformation efforts.  A serious error that I've seen in my years as a consultant is companies who fail to support the transformation program after the "go-live". That go-live could be an actual systems launch, or it could be a redesign of a company's organizational structure.  In any event, changes made during the transformation need to be reinforced post go-live in order for the changes to be firmly anchored in the company's culture.  With that in mind, here are some things to consider as you plan and execute a finance transformation program.

1. Keep the transformation team together for a defined period after go-live.  Too many times companies are eager to get the transformation team personnel back to their "regular" positions.  If the company was smart, they put some of their best people on the project, so the desire to redeploy these individuals is, in part, understandable.  However, dissolving the team prematurely puts all of the hard word at risk.  A "quick strike" team is needed to solve issues that inevitably crop up after a project launch.  Let your experience team be available to assist where needed and reinforce the reality and perception of a successful project.
2. Eliminate the "old way" of doing things.  Once an organization has crossed over the bridge to a new way of life, don't let people fall back into the old way of doing things.  This can range from exerting the organizational authority of a governance council to blocking access to old software applications.  If people are allowed to revert to past behaviors, some portion of people will do so.
3. Reinforce expected behaviors.  People need to be reminded of the new behaviors that are expected.  Any positions that changed materially as part of the transformation should have had updated role descriptions created.  The program leaders should be visible and vocal to ensure that people understand what is expected and how their performance is critical to the transformation initiative.
4. Promote the success of the transformation program.  During the transformation process, the metrics that define success should have been developed.  Post go-live is the time to start tracking the progress of the program and measuring that progress against the key metrics.  Most programs will meet or exceed some goals while requiring adjustment to achieve others.  This is to be expected.  Individuals in the organization should understand the success and opportunities of a newly implemented transformation program, and this requires transparency.  Yes, that can be a little scary at times, but it's required for people to understand how their new behaviors contribute to the program success.

Finance Transformation programs require a great deal of work and sacrifice.  It's critical that the momentum of a transformation program be maintained post go-live to ensure the full success of the program.

China passes U.S. as top FDI destination

China recently passed the U.S. as the country of choice for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). In the first half of 2012, China (excluding Hong Kong) received FDI of $59.1 billion compared to the U.S.' $57.4 billion (Source: Global Investment Trends Monitor released by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development).

Not all is rosy for China though. According to an article in the China Daily, China is losing some investments to neighboring countries in Southeast Asia. An excerpt:

Developing economies for the first time absorbed half of global FDI in the first half of 2012, despite a decline of 5 percent year-on-year.

"China is experiencing structural adjustments in their FDI flows, including the relocation of labor-intensive and low-end market-oriented FDI to neighboring countries," said the report.

Members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations demonstrated strong attraction for global foreign direct investment. FDI inflows to Cambodia surged by more than 165 percent year-on-year in the first half, while inflows to Thailand rose by 62.1 percent and inflows to the Philippines increased by 10.6 percent, according to the report.

"For investment oriented with low costs, pulling out is normal and will continue in the future owing to China's rising costs and appreciation of local currency," Zhang said.

You can read the full article at: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2012-10/29/content_15854071.htm

Brazil power outage reveals strain on country's infrastructure

Brazil has been in the news lately, and not for the reasons it would like.  Brazil recently suffered a failure of its electrical system that impacted large portions of the country, and highlighted the strain of growth that has been placed on the country's infrastructure.

Brazil has been at the forefront of economic development in Latin America.  Cities like Sao Paulo and Rio have been traditional choices for Shared Services but other cities like Campinas and Curitiba are also experiencing growth as more multinationals move into those cities.  The overall effect, along with the demand for electricity from Brazil's population, has put the spotlight on the country's infrastructure. Other sources of blame for the failure include government regulation, forced rate cuts and inadequate investment in transmission capabilities.

An article from Businessweek highlights the problems.  Here's an excerpt:

Power was knocked out in 11 Brazilian states last night, leaving residents in the dark for several hours as the country’s latest blackout raises questions about the reliability of the electricity grid.

Power failures can occur in any country.  Just ask India.  But as multinationals evaluate various locations around the globe for potential shared service center sites, it's good to keep in mind which countries can keep the lights on.

Source: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-26/brazil-suffers-fifth-power-outage-since-crackdown-on-utilities

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Inadequate Change Management

Note: Today's post is part of an ongoing series that looks at various pitfalls in finance transformation and what can be done to avoid them.

All to often, a transformation effort focuses on the process and forgets about the humans.  This is particularly true when a transformation effort is accompanied by an ERP implementation or upgrade.  The engagement team is so focused on the successful go-live of the technology they forget that people are needed to make those processes work effectively.  The most successful engagements focus on not only the technology, but also the people.

My experience indicates that change mangement is an area that is often diminished in the planning and budgeting phase of a tranformation effort.  Typically, executives have sticker shock over the cost of a transformation engagement, particulary where this is a large technology component, that they start looking for ways to cut the budget.  And unfortunately, Change Management is typically one of those areas that gets cut first.

This is a mistake.  Without effective Change Management, the risk that a transformation initiative will fail to live up to expectations is high.  In any large transformation effort, a number of people both inside and outside of the organization will be impacted.  Without proper Change Management, these individuals either won't know how to modify their behavior or they won't care.  An effective Change Management program will clearly lay out the behavioral implications of transformation and provide the support mechanisms to understand required behavioral change and the tools to support that change.  This includes, at a minimum, effective communication and training plans.

When companies invest properly in Change Management, they achieve greater results from their transformation initiative and the required behavioral changes stay embedded in the organizational culture.  When this happens, true transformation occurs. 

Chile focuses higher education on global sourcing

An article at Nearshore Americas discusses Chile's focus on higher education and how they're working to equip Chileans to compete in the global market.  Of interesting note is that only 4% of Chileans speak English at the professional level.

An excerpt:

CORFO (Chile's Economic Development Agency) has a national English language registry that counts 46,000 Chileans.  In 2011, some 8,050 of those registered sought out testing and 34 percent of them tested at an intermediate level.

“CORFO is still giving grants to study English.  It is a model that has been adopted by other countries in South America.  Really only about four percent of Chileans speak and write English at a professional level, that is why bilingual call centers have never been so popular here.  Those that have a high level of English are usually working in some other capacity like KPO or IT Services,” added Stojkovic.

You can read the full article at: Chile’s Short History of Reshaping Higher Education to Power Global Services

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Inadequate Technology Investment

Note: Today's post is part of an ongoing series that looks at various pitfalls in finance transformation and what can be done to avoid them.

Many of the challenges in finance transformation, such as lack of senior management support or the lack of stakeholder engagement, must be overcome in order to have an effective transformation program. Technology support is one of those areas that isn't black and white.

I say this because I honestly believe that because there are opportunities to engage in continuous improvement without large expenditures in technology, but I know from experience that companies with significant transformation programs are committed to technology investments that support the transformation strategy.

I once had a client that was developing a shared service center in the Far East to handled a number of countries in that region.  The center would handled a number of transactional processes, such as accounts payable, customer invoicing, fixed assets and general accounting.  Overall it was a successful implementation that met it's goals.  One challenge, however, is that various countries such as Japan require that certain documents like vendor invoices be retained in country.  A scanning and workflow package would have worked very nicely to get the information to the SSC while retaining the original documents in the country.  Unfortunately, this particular client was spending millions to get the SSC in place but wouldn't spring for the relevant technology to scan and route documents.  Instead, they chose to have their people fax the invoices to the SSC.  Yes it worked, but it created an inefficiency in the process when the transformation effort should have been focused on optimizing processes across the value chain.

This is one small example.  Other companies consolidate processes but still operate off of multiple ERP systems.  This isn't insurmountable, and there can still be real benefits to consolidation and shared services without the perfect, one instance, global ERP platform.  But there's no denying that it helps.  So don't stop improving and transforming in ways that don't require large technology investments, but be realistic about what you can achieve over the long-term without a comprehensive strategy of IT enablement that supports the transformation vision.

Nordic Shared Services Conference

The Shared Services and Outsourcing Network (SSON) is sponsoring a conference in Stockholm, Sweden this October.  The Conference will cover a number of topics related to shared services and outsourcing. Check out the link in the upper right of this page to find out more.

IRS Lags on Approval of Advanced Pricing Agreements for Transfer Pricing

Multi-national corporations have a variety of options to price goods and services that are sold between the various countries in which they operate.  Each method has its pros and cons, but in addition to internal cost transfer considerations, these multi-national corporations also have to make the tax authorities in those countries happy, since the pricing mechanism chosen impacts the profit in each country and the subsequent taxes that country collects.

In the U.S., the IRS offers these companies an Advanced Pricing Agreement (APA) option so that the risk of a subsequent dispute is eliminated.  The problem is that the IRS is way behind on approving these APAs.

An article at CFO.com picks up on the challenges the IRS and companies face:

Senior finance and tax executives may well be wondering whether their companies should work with the Internal Revenue Service on transfer-pricing agreements after learning about the agency’s latest progress report. Last week the IRS revealed that it processed fewer Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) last year, and the average time the IRS takes to process such deals rose to 40.7 months last year from the 37.2 months reported in 2010.

The article goes on to cite several causes, including a need to coordinate with other countries' tax authorities and the need to resolve complex cases that can provide guidance for simplier cases.

The issue of Transfer Pricing continues to be a hot button issue as tax authorities around the world take a hard look at tax revenue.

You can read the full article at: IRS Holding Up Transfer-Pricing Deals for Years.

Groupon Lawsuit Focuses on Improper Accounting and Weak Internal Controls

A news story from Reuters discusses a recent lawsuit filed against the daily deal company Groupon.  It lawsuit alleges improper accounting for customer refunds as well as an insufficient internal control structure.  An excerpt from the Reuters article:

According to a complaint filed in federal court in Groupon's hometown of Chicago, the company overstated revenue, issued materially false and misleading financial results, and concealed how its business was not growing as fast and was not nearly as resistant to competition as it had suggested.

I'll remind everyone that allegations in a lawsuit is not tantamount to fact, but it is a strong reminder that finance organizations should never lose site of the blocking and tackling  of accounting operations.  A strong internal control structure isn't just about preventive and detective controls, although those are certainly important.  It's also about the overall control environment and the "tone at the top"; that is, how senior management creates and supports the overall culture around the integrity of its financial statements.

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Inadequate Project Management

Note: This post is part of a series on the challenges of transformation and how to overcome them.

Inadequate project management.

Too many transformation initiatives either fail outright or don't achieve all of the goals due to poor project management.  One of the challenges I've seen in a number of organizations is that it's assumed a single person can be both intimately involved in the effort, perhaps as a subject matter specialist, and somehow manage the project "on the side". 

Even a relatively small transformation effort requires a full-time project manager.  Too often I've seen a person who is splitting their time between project manager and team member activities focus on the urgent needs of the project while unintentionally ignoring the important, but longer-term requirements of project management. The project manager must be able to step back from the urgent activities of the day to look at the longer term plan.  They need to see the forest for the trees, so to speak.

A second issue is that a person might be a good general manager in their organization but be a poor project manager.  There is some overlap in the skillset but there are also some key differences.  Most transformation efforts require a full-time project manager who's been down the road before.  The best project managers are the ones who can lead people and manage projects.  It's sometimes difficult to find those two roles in one person, but the project and the organization will be better for it if that type of person can be found.

The last point I should make is that while separate roles for Project Manager and Team Member is ideal, projects can still be successful if both roles are combined into one, which typically occurs on small projects.  When this does happen, however, it's critical that the Project Manager set some time aside each day to look at the longer-term implications of the project and to stay on top of the risks that can derail a transformation initiative.

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Inadequate Stakeholder Engagement

Note: This post is part of a series on the challenges of transformation and how to overcome them.

Inadequate Stakeholder Engagement

A good way to ensure that a transformation effort will fail is to exclude the stakeholders that will ultimately be impacted by the transformation.  It's rare that stakeholders are completely excluded. It's far more common for there to be token lip service to integrating stakeholders into the project.

An essential act for any engagement is to identify the major stakeholders that are impacted by the proposed change.  Remember that important stakeholders are not only those who have a formal title, but also those individuals who have significant influence on "public opinion" and who can derail a project if their concern are not considered.

The word to remember here is "RACI".  OK, so it's not really a word, but a way of remembering the role of the project stakeholders.  RACI stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted and Informed. At the start of a project, the project team should identify the individuals, by name and position, that fall into these four categories.  This will help the team draw the stakeholders into the engagement and ensure that their input is incorporated as the project progresses.

By identifying the significant stakeholders for a project and including them throughout the duration of the project, it's far more likely that the stakeholders will embrace the transformation rather than sabotaging it from the outside.

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Lack of Senior Level Support

Note: This post is part of a series on the challenges of transformation and how to overcome them.

Lack of Senior Level Support

Every project has a senior sponsor, at least in name.  But here's the rub - people aren't stupid.  They understand when a project has the backing and support of senior management and when someone's just there for window dressing. 

The Executive Sponsor plays an important role by setting the tone of the engagement and ensuring the project has the right skills and funding to be successful.  A common shortcoming in senior level support is the Sponsor who attends the kick-off, says a few words, and then disappears from sight.  Sure, they may show up at the steering committee meetings once a month, but the regular troops rarely see or hear from the sponsor again.  Real sponsorship is present in word and deed, and is highly visable to the people on the front line engaging in transformation.  What are some of the things an Executive Sponsor can do to ensure a successful transformation initiative?  Glad you asked.

1. Create a compelling vision and effectively communicate that vision.  People need to know where they're going and what value they will be creating.  A lack luster vision usually leads to lackluster results, as it's difficult to sharply focus energy and attention on a vaguely defined mission.
2. Create a guiding coalition.  Yeah, I got this from John Kotter at Harvard University, but he's a pretty smart guy.  An Executive Sponsor can't do it alone.  He or she needs a team of experienced and influential leaders who know how to get things done.
3. Pave the way with resources.  That could mean getting the budget to bring in the proper skills to a project or ensuring that a company's IT systems have what they need to be properly built, tested and deployed.
4. Overcome organizational resistance. In any project there will be those that benefit from the status quo.  The Executive Sponsor should be aware of resistance to the initiaitve and work to overcome it.

This list is by no means exhaustive, but strong project sponsorship can mean the difference between success of failure for transformation initiatives.

FASB, IASB to Work on Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments

As part of the ongoing effort at reporting convergence between FASB and IASB, the Boards will look at the issue of financial instrument classification and measurement.  The Journal of Accountancy has a brief article on topic:  An excerpt is shown below:

FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) are working together to reduce differences in their respective classification and measurement models for financial instruments.

The boards announced Friday that they will explore these models jointly, then decide whether to propose amendments to IFRS and U.S. GAAP.

These discussions will take place as part of FASB’s ongoing reconsideration of a Proposed Accounting Standards Update (ASU) on financial instruments. The Proposed ASU, Accounting for Financial Instruments and Revisions to the Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—Financial Instruments (Topic 825) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), was originally issued in May 2010. The IASB will take the discussions with FASB into consideration in its project to make limited changes to IFRS 9, Financial Instruments, which was issued in November 2009. The IASB’s project was amended in 2010 as a result of its ongoing work to develop a new IFRS on insurance contracts and feedback received on how IFRS 9 applies to particular instruments.

Here's the link to the article:  FASB, IASB to Work on Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments.

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Inadequate Project Resources

Note: This post is part of a series on the challenges of transformation and how to overcome them.

Inadequate Project Resources

Even projects that are launched with a great deal of planning can fail if the staffing is inadequate.  Sometimes the inadequate part comes from the number of dedicated resources and sometimes it's the quality of the people assigned.  On a really bad engagement it can be both.  Companies that manage projects well understand that a transformation effort should be staffed by the company's best people, not their worst. 

One challenge that companies often have is that it's difficult and expensive to backfill positions.  The willingness of a company to backfill key positions is essential on most projects so that personnel assigned to the project don't also have to perform their "day job".  If backfilling doesn't happen, project staffing plans will have to maintain the fiction that these personnel will devote half a day to the project and half a day to their regular job - 12 hours each.  On major projects, the reality is that there will need to be a core group of individuals who are focused solely on the success of the project. 

In addition to an adequate level of staff who are focused on the project as their primary job, it's essential to choose individuals for both specific capabilities and their ability to lead initiatives.  Many of these project resources will have to use their influence to drive change in the organization, as they won't have direct managerial oversight of the many people required to successfully engage in transformation.  Individuals, particularly at the team lead level or higher, have to be comfortable pushing the envelope and engaging disparate stakeholders.  Companies that don't choose the best people because the departments "can't afford to let these people go" end up paying for it in the long-run (and ocassionally the short-run).  Do yourself a favor and pick the best people for the project and you'll likely be rewarded with an on-time and on-budget project that meets your intended goals.

Global Finance 360 focuses on the world of corporate finance and accounting and how these activities are impacted by globalization. As companies adjust to a changing world, Finance departments must also adapt to the changing environment as they seek to be value-added business partners. From Bangor, Maine to Bangalore, India, we examine the global changes impacting Finance and Accounting.

Friday Five: A Global Perspective | January 27, 2012

1. China-Briefing: Shenzhen and Beijing Raise Minimum Wages
   
   
2. India's Business Standard: IMF Cut World Growth Outlook as Eurozone Weighs
   
   
3. The Outsourcing Buzz Blog: Orchestrating Your Transition with Experienced Players
   
   
4. The China Digital Times: China: Slowing but Still Growing
   
   
5. Tico Times: Costa Rica Surpasses Foreign Investment Goals

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Unrealistic Project Timelines

Note: This post is part of a series on the challenges of transformation and how to overcome them.

Unrealistic Project Timelines

It's been said that when it comes to project management, you'll want it to be cheap, fast and right.  Unfortunately, you only get to choose two of those dimensions.  It's an unfortunate reality of life that timelines are often chosen for political considerations rather than basing the time frame on the objectives of the engagement, the defined scope and the number and quality of the resources assigned to the project. 

Project timelines should be built from the bottom up, with a detailed analysis of all the tasks that need to be completed, the key interdependencies between phases and tasks and the number of hours estimated to complete each task.  Extra time needs to be added for project management, vacation, and non-project related training.  Additionally, if something comes up during the project that pushes out the critical path, it's imperative that the project be reset, either through extending the timeline or by adding additional resources if that's feasible.

One of the fastest ways for a transformation project to go bad is to improperly prepare for the actual initiative.  Too many times a project is launched and no one wants to "waste time" with all that preparation stuff.  The reality is that preparation is key to a successful project.  And that includes everything from clarifying the objectives in the Project Charter to figuring out where people are going to sit and how they'll gain access to the virtual project team room.

Another challenge I see with tight project timelines is that key resources are often scheduled for multiple tasks that run concurrently.  This should be eliminated as part of the resource leveling exercise, but often these conflicts are dismissed with a "it'll all work out" mentality.  Project timelines are notoriously unrealistic when they double book resources and don't consider activities such as meeting and vacations.

Through proper preparation and realistic consideration of key activities, dependencies and resources, the project team can substantially reduce risk to the project by establishing a realistic project schedule.

Blogging for a Cause at Toolbox.com

I'm currently part of a blogging contest over at Toolbox.com.  My chosen charity is Habitat for Humanity International.  Please visit the Toolbox link and comment on, Tweet and Like my posts.  Every bit helps.  And when you do, you'll put me that much closer to a donation to Habitat.  Thanks.

Finance Transformation Gone Wrong - Vaguely Defined Project Scope

No one plans for a project to jump the track. They're all launched with the best of intentions. However, somewhere along the way something happens. Often, it's multiple "somethings". I once had someone land on my blog with the search term "Finance Transformation Gone Wrong". I had to laugh, as anyone who's been in the business of transformation has seen good projects turn bad for a variety of reasons.

For those engaged in the art of transformation, this series will discuss some ways a project can head south, along with the appropriate remediation strategies to increase the probability of project success. One of the first ways a project can run into trouble is through vaguely defined project scope.

Vaguely defined scope

There are times when a transformation effort goes wrong before the project even starts. If a transformation project is planned badly, it will be difficult to make up during the actual project. One of the chief culprits is scope. It's one of those things that sounds like it should be easy but in practical terms is difficult to define. The devil, as they say, is in the details. This is an area that should be thought through very carefully during the planning stage, agreed by the major stakeholders, and committed to in writing.

A key to keeping a sharp focus on scope is to keep the project's ambitions manageable. Picking a scope such as "let's revolutionize Finance" is bound to create problems since everyone has a different idea of what it means to revolutionize Finance. Heck, people can have different ideas of what it means to optimize the accounts payable invoice entry process. To boost project success, sharply define project scope and keep it in manageable chunks.

The second point is related. It isn't enough for the Project Manager or Executive Sponsor to have a sharply defined project scope. The important stakeholders who can support or derail a project must also agree on the project scope and its intended impact on the organization. And this is an area where silence definitely does not equal consent. There must be overt agreement of the scope of the transformation effort and its expected results.

A third point to keep in mind is to manage "scope creep". This can kill an otherwise solid project. Scope creep occurs when a project is expanded beyond the original scope as set out in the Statement of Work or other project documents. As the phrase "scope creep" implies, it often occurs in very subtle ways that may seem reasonable at the time but that, with time and volume, can weigh down a project and keep it from coming in on time and on budget. There should should be a very strict change control process in place so that when the inevitable scope issues come up, there is a defined process for managing scope changes. Any proposed change should be supported by a business case that provides a compelling business and/or economic reason for the proposed change. A business case doesn't have to be huge, but if there is a good reason for a scope change, it should be documented and approved according to the project's governance structure.

By creating manageable transformation initiatives, gaining agreement amongst critical stakeholders, and implementing a strong governance process for scope changes, a finance organization can begin the process of successful transformation.