CFO Role Expectations

Just 20% of procurement teams are recognised for cost avoidance I think that sucks Here's why your business should care: ➟ Stops price creep from silently draining margins ➟ It's harder to grow top line, easier to stop avoidable costs ➟ Cost avoidance is proactive risk management disguised as finance In this post 👇 1. How procurement should be tracking cost avoidance in 2025 2. How to align the metric with finance 3. The cost avoidance calculation 4. How to track and report it Let's start with the basics: 1️⃣ Define a Clear, Approved Baseline The baseline is what you would have paid if no action was taken. Possible baselines: ↳ Should-cost models ↳ Budgeted increase assumptions ↳ Supplier proposed price increases ↳ Historical price escalations (CPI-linked contracts) ↳ Market index increases (commodities, logistics rates) Example: Supplier proposed £10 → Negotiated to £9 = £1/unit avoided or Market forecast shows +5%, procurement holds price flat 2️⃣ Align with Finance on Recognition Rules ↳ How and when it gets recognised (if at all) ↳ What qualifies as legitimate cost avoidance ↳ What evidence is required (quotes, emails, market data) ↳ I like to track it separately from hard savings but report both. 3️⃣ Cost Avoidance Calculation Formula Avoided Cost = (Avoided Price Increase × Actual or Forecast Volume) Example: Avoided £1 increase × 50,000 units = £50,000 cost avoidance For demand avoidance (avoiding unnecessary spend): Avoided Spend = (Planned Volume – Actual Volume) × Price 4️⃣ Documentation and Audit Trail Because it’s hypothetical by nature: ↳ Validate with finance for major items ↳ Keep date-stamped records of negotiations ↳ Document supplier proposals or market forecasts ↳ Use external benchmarks when supplier quotes are unavailable Track and report separately from cost savings ↳ Separate hard savings and cost avoidance ↳ Break down by category, supplier, geography, and initiative type via (i) Monthly operational updates (ii) Quarterly procurement leadership reviews (ii) Annual CFO dashboard (ideally blended with total value impact: savings + avoidance + risk reduction) Finally, some pro tips: ➟ Standardise what counts as cost avoidance across procurement, finance, and business units. Make it a commonly agreed and recognised metric. ➟ Use external market indices (commodity prices, CPI, shipping rates) for credibility ➟ Link avoidance initiatives to business KPIs like margin protection, price stability, ESG compliance ➟ Bundle avoidance metrics into total value delivered reports for CPO dashboards _________ If after doing this, your CFO or CEO still doesn't value cost avoidance 🤷 The problem is THEM not YOU I promise! Repost ♻️ if this helped.

Most high-income professionals overpay in taxes not by a little, but by hundreds of thousands of dollars. And the worst part? Most of them don’t even realize it’s happening I recently worked with an executive who was unknowingly missing out on over $500,000 in potential tax savings. Like many high-income professionals, she assumed her CPA was handling everything. But here’s the problem: 🚫 Most CPAs think backwards, not forwards. They file taxes based on what already happened. 🚫 They don’t integrate financial planning, investments, and tax strategy. 🚫 Some of them miss opportunities that can save you money long-term. How We Fixed It & Saved Her Over $500K ✅ 1. The HSA Strategy – $20K+ in Lifetime Tax Savings She had access to an HSA (Health Savings Account) but wasn’t using it. Why does this matter? 👉🏾HSA contributions are tax-deductible. 👉🏾The money grows tax-free. 👉🏾Withdrawals for medical expenses are tax-free. By fully funding it every year, she’ll save $20,000+ in taxes over her lifetime. But here’s the kicker: we also helped her invest it properly so the account grows instead of just sitting in cash. ✅ 2. The Roth Conversion Strategy – $500K+ in Tax-Free Growth She was anticipating losing her job and had multiple old retirement accounts just sitting there. Instead of letting those accounts stagnate, we saw an opportunity: 👉🏾She was having a low-income year, which meant she could convert $100,000 into a Roth IRA at a lower tax rate. 👉🏾That $100K will now grow tax-free—meaning if it reaches $600K or $700K in retirement, she’ll never pay a cent in taxes on that money. ✅ 3. The Bonus Strategy – Tax-Loss Harvesting We also helped her offset investment gains using tax-loss harvesting, a strategy that allows you to sell underperforming investments and use the losses to reduce your tax bill. By combining these strategies, we helped her: 💰 Save $20K+ in taxes on HSA contributions 💰 Unlock $500K+ of future tax-free income through Roth conversions 💰 Offset capital gains and lower her tax bill through tax-loss harvesting And she almost missed out on all of this because she assumed her CPA was handling everything. If you’re making multiple six figures, but you aren’t actively planning your tax strategy, you’re leaving money on the table plain and simple. The best financial strategies aren’t about making more money they’re about keeping more of what you earn. If you want to see where you might be overpaying, shoot me a message. Let’s make sure you’re taking advantage of every opportunity. P.S See the look on my face…don’t make me have to give you that look because you’re paying more than your fair share in taxes. 😂

🔍 What Is a Risk Assessment Methodology? A risk assessment methodology is the structured approach an organization uses to identify, analyze, evaluate, and prioritize risks. It ensures consistent, repeatable assessments across all business areas and is essential for risk-informed decision-making. ⸻ ✅ Core Components of a Risk Assessment Methodology: 1. Risk Identification • Pinpoint what could go wrong (risk events). • Sources: business processes, historical incidents, regulatory changes, third-party risks, IT systems, etc. • Tools: brainstorming, risk checklists, process walkthroughs, SWOT, interviews, PESTLE. 2. Risk Analysis • Determine the likelihood and impact of each risk. • Approaches: • Qualitative (e.g., High/Medium/Low or Heat Maps) • Semi-quantitative (e.g., scoring systems 1–5 for likelihood and impact) • Quantitative (e.g., Monte Carlo, VaR, financial modeling) 3. Risk Evaluation • Compare risk levels to your risk appetite and tolerance thresholds. • Decide which risks are acceptable, and which need treatment or escalation. 4. Risk Prioritization • Rank risks based on their score to allocate resources effectively. • Often visualized in a risk matrix or heat map. 5. Risk Treatment (Optional in Assessment Phase) • Recommend how to handle critical risks: • Avoid • Transfer • Mitigate (via controls) • Accept 📊 Common Methodologies Used: 1️⃣ISO 31000 Framework Emphasizes integration, structure, and continuous improvement in risk management. 2️⃣ COSO ERM Framework Aligns risk with strategy and performance across governance, culture, and objective-setting. 3️⃣ Basel II/III for Financial Risk Used in banking and finance, focusing on credit, market, and operational risk. 4️⃣ NIST Risk Assessment Applied in cybersecurity and federal agencies, emphasizing threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts. 🎯 Best Practices: • Use both inherent and residual risk ratings. • Involve first-line teams for accurate process-level risk input. • Align methodology with risk appetite and strategic objectives. • Document risk criteria (likelihood/impact definitions) clearly. • Update the risk assessment periodically or after significant events.

Many mergers and acquisitions overlook a crucial detail. Insurance. It's not just a line item. It's a potential risk to your entire deal. When you merge or acquire, you may inherit all existing policies, good or bad. Often, these policies are outdated. Or worse, they're insufficient. Or your current insurance may not cover the new risk properly. Imagine closing a deal only to discover hidden liabilities. Or unexpected coverage gaps. That's a nightmare for the economics of the deal. And your reputation. So, what's the solution? Involve your insurance advisor early. Much earlier than you think is necessary. Conduct a thorough audit of all existing policies. Assess their adequacy. And their alignment with your new business goals. This proactive approach isn't just smart. It's essential. It saves you from unexpected costs. And ensures a smoother integration. Don't let insurance be your blind spot. Make it a strategic priority in every merger and acquisition.

Board FAQs #3: Should board members have 1-1 investor meetings with the main shareholders of the company? Shareholder communication is a key responsibility of the board, but it is primarily carried out through the CEO and the Investor Relations (IR) team. Ensuring transparency, managing expectations, and aligning on strategic goals are crucial to this process. Here’s how the communication flow typically works: 1. Board’s role in reporting: The board ensures the quality of the directors’ report and disclosures in the annual and quarterly reports. 2. Annual shareholder meetings: The board attends annual meetings, where the Chair addresses shareholders and answers questions. 3. Primary interfaces for shareholder communication: The CEO, senior executives, and the IR team handle day-to-day interactions with shareholders and analysts. 4. Ongoing investor interactions: The CEO and senior executives, supported by the IR team, lead investor communications during earnings calls and roadshows. The question of whether board members should meet one-on-one with major shareholders is nuanced. Let’s explore both the potential benefits and risks. Benefits of 1-1 meetings with major shareholders: 1. Deeper understanding: These meetings can help board members gain valuable insights into shareholder expectations and concerns. 2. Informed decision-making: This information can guide board members in making more informed decisions at the board level. Risks of regular 1-1 meetings with major shareholders: 1. Misaligned communication: Frequent one-on-one meetings could lead to misalignment in messaging. The board must ensure that any communication with investors is consistent with the company’s public communications strategy. 2. Equal access to information: These meetings could create perceptions of preferential treatment or unequal access to information. Guidelines for 1-1 meetings: 1. Selective engagement: When done selectively, these meetings can provide valuable insights without disrupting the broader communication strategy. 2. Listening meetings: Positioning these meetings as listening sessions helps maintain objectivity and ensures clarity in communication. What are your thoughts on the role of board members in shareholder communication? Should they engage in 1-1 meetings with major investors? Share your views in the comments below! #boardofdirectors #boardgovernance Board FAQ #3 Image designed by Freepik

Mergers and acquisitions often fail to deliver the value anticipated. I have been involved in several during my career, not just as a deal-maker but as part of the post-merger team. At a high level, there are five success criteria for ensuring successful integrations: 1) Deal Alignment 2) Operational Precision 3) Value Creation 4) Cultural Alignment 5) Repeatability and Scalability Typically, Deal Alignment and Operational Precision are successful. Adrenalin is rushing, everyone is working towards a fixed deadline with set scripts to execute according to a plan. But after the headlines, when the lawyers and deal makers have packed up, the work becomes less academic and more practical. Many integrations get lost in the tactical aspects of the deal and miss out on the deeper, more complex goals: creating new value and uniting cultures. While M&A is often focused on efficiencies, a more important challenge is making the whole greater than the sum of its parts. Too often, value is lost because the focus turns to efficiency targets rather than empowering people to deliver positive impact to customers. In 2005, I was part of the turnaround team for a company called Energis which was acquired by Cable & Wireless for almost a $1 billion. It was hailed by the FT as the "greatest turnaround in corporate British history". The management team of Energis took over at C&W and great value creation was promised to C&W's shareholders. It was intended to strengthen C&W's position in the UK telecoms market by expanding its customer base and service offerings. Instead, the focus shifted to relentless cost-cutting, but the financial and operational hurdles persisted. C&W ultimately split into two separate entities, and in 2012, Vodafone acquired its UK and global enterprise business for $1.6 billion, a clear sign that the Energis acquisition hadn’t delivered the expected value. Integrations like these reveal a hard truth: capturing true value in M&A requires more than just initial alignment and cost efficiencies; it demands a long-term focus on culture and shared purpose. How can companies ensure that value creation and cultural alignment remain priorities beyond the initial deal? And what would it take for leaders to measure M&A success not just by efficiency gains but by the real impact on customers and employees? Look out for tomorrow's post where I explore these questions. #Mergers #value #Integration #Acquistion Enjoyed this? ♻️ Share it and follow Holly Joint for insights on strategy, leadership, culture, and women in a tech-driven future. 🙌🏻 All views are my own.

Here’s the truth: Deals win or die by what happens after close. M&A isn’t just about numbers. It’s about envisioning the end state. I’ve seen too many deals get done for the wrong reasons—chasing revenue, ego, or momentum—without ever asking: What do we want this to look like after the dust settles? That’s why Buyer-Led M&A flips the script. We lead with clarity, not chaos. 🔹 Start by mapping the end state. Not just the financials—think operating model, customer experience, and decision-making structure. What does “success” actually look like? 🔹 Then dig into culture. Forget the surface-level values page. You need to understand how decisions get made, how people work, and how priorities shift under pressure. That’s the real culture. 🔹 Now you can start building a joint go-to-market plan. This is your integration thesis. What does the customer experience look like as a combined company? 🔹 Integration planning should run parallel to diligence. Same team. Shared information. Continuous learning. That’s how you get to Day 1 readiness—and avoid repeating diligence after you’ve already bought the company. 🔹 Finally: reverse diligence. Let the target get to know you. This is a two-way street. The more transparency, the more alignment, the more likely you’ll retain the people who actually make the deal work. M&A isn’t a race to term sheets. It’s a race to value creation—and that starts by leading the process, not just following it. This is how I define the Buyer-Led M&A™ mindset. What am I missing? Let me know in the comments. #MergersAndAcquisitions #BuyerLedMA #DealRoom

Now that technologists have gotten their 0s and 1s in line with Generative AI, financial leaders are queuing up the dollars and cents behind it.    Deloitte’s AI-Fueled™ Finance Transformation report (https://deloi.tt/3ZV8jme) is a pragmatic guide for CFOs and finance leaders looking to maximize the value of AI investments. Our aim is to support conversations around GenAI that help leaders act today and lay the groundwork for tomorrow’s transformational outcomes.    To help financial leaders stay ahead of the curve with GenAI investments, we’ve laid out core pillars for surveying the tangible values of integrating these technologies for financial teams:   📊 Measured AI adoption: target investments today to build competencies for future, larger implementations.   🏛️ Data readiness & governance: efficiently prepare and govern data to enable AI applications   📚 Finance AI skills: enhance AI skills to enable real-time visibility and strategic decision-making in finance.   Thanks to James Glover, Rj Littleton, Gina Schaefer, Snædis G. Walsh Walsh, Cameron Andriola, Robyn Peters, JoAnna Scullin, MBA, Mark Gustafson, Arjun Krishnamurthy, Geoffrey K., Prashant Patri, Daniel Siegel, Sonal Sood, and Court Watson, CFA for your guidance and hard work on this report!

Welcome to the second edition of our four-part series diving deep into early-stage business funding. Thanks for all the great feedback last week. This week, we're exploring Non-Dilutive and Debt Financing. Non-dilutive funding, especially R&D grants, government programs, and innovative debt options, can be transformative, preserving your ownership and significantly enhancing valuation. In this newsletter I look at: R&D Grants: A deep dive into opportunities like Innovate UK Smart Grants and the U.S. SBIR/STTR programs, highlighting how these grants validate your technology and increase valuations by 15-30%. Traditional Debt Financing: Discover how UK startups leverage British Business Bank guarantees and U.S. founders use SBA loans to strategically extend their runway without dilution. Invoice and Revenue-Based Financing: Flexible, scalable solutions ideal for managing working capital, maintaining equity, and aligning payments with your growth. The goal is to help you understand how to strategically combine various non-equity funding mechanisms to accelerate your startup's growth while maximising founder control. Check out the full newsletter 👇 Stay tuned for next week's instalment on Equity Financing..... #StartupFunding #NonDilutiveFunding #DebtFinancing #Grants #StartupGrowth #FounderAdvice #IdeasforaBetterWorld