265. CFO 4.0 Revisited: Navigating Financial Planning in a Dynamic Business Environment with James Owen

 For this CFO 4.0 Revisited episode, Hannah Munro is joined by James Owen, Global CFO of the Profiles Division at Kantar, to explore how modern finance leaders are reshaping planning, forecasting, and decision-making in an increasingly data-driven world. 

What’s covered in this episode

• Why market data is essential for meaningful performance benchmarking
• How to improve communication and understanding of financial insights across the business
• The role of Integrated Business Planning in driving better forecasts and decisions
• Why data science is becoming a core capability within finance teams
• How to assess finance talent beyond technical skills
• The importance of scenario planning across ambition, realism, and prudence

Links mentioned in this episode:

• James’ LinkedIn
• Learn more about Kantar
• Chief Financial Officer UK Flagship Summit

• Explore other CFO 4.0 Podcast episodes here.
• Subscribe to our Podcast!

Transcript

Welcome To CFO 4.0

SPEAKER_01 0:00

Welcome to CFO 4.0, the future of finance. The CFO role is changing rapidly. Moving from cost controller to strategic visionary. And with every change comes opportunity. We are here to help you take advantage of this transition, to win at work, drive your career forward, and lead with confidence. Join Hannah Monroe, Managing Director of iTest, a financial transformation consultancy where she interviews key experts to give you real-world advice and guidance on how to transform your processes, people, and data. Welcome to CFO 4.0, the future of finance.

SPEAKER_03 0:48

So hello everybody, and welcome to this episode of CFO 4.0. I have a treat for our listeners. So you may remember a previous guest of ours, so James Owen, who is the global CFO of the Profiles Division at CamTAR. So he is back with us to talk as well, let's just talk about a few different topics. So welcome, James. Thank you for coming back on the show.

SPEAKER_04 1:12

Thank you very much for inviting me. I had a lot of fun last time.

James Owen’s Background At Cantar

SPEAKER_03 1:16

So did I, and I had some great feedback from our podcast. So if you listeners wonder um whether it's worth reaching out to give me uh thoughts and commentary and feedback on these episodes, it definitely is because I do I do actually listen and uh feedback. So um so James, just um for those that perhaps haven't heard um the last session or um maybe they they've they've it's been a while since they listened to it. So could you give us a bit of a background uh about yourself and and perhaps some of the recent stuff you've done as well?

SPEAKER_04 1:48

Yeah, no problem. So I'm um I'm more of a commercial finance uh professional than uh more of a technical finance person. So most of my career has been spent in retail and FMCG and sort of high growth scale, scale-up kind of organizations. Um so until the last two and a half years, that's where uh I I was. And then I re-entered the large blue chip space with Cantar about two and a half years ago. Uh so my role is to look after the profile subvision, as you uh kindly said earlier on. So Qantar is a global market research firm, big, big company. We touch tens of thousands of large organizations around the world, and we advise companies how to do their marketing, uh, how to bring a new product uh to the marketplace, etc. And we do that by having a very, very large panel of humans around the world that we understand deeply and can ask questions to. And the profiles division is that part of the business. We've got over seven million panelists around the world that we engage with on a daily, hourly minute basis as well. So we get this incredibly rich data, analyze it, and then pass on the best possible advice from there. So my my journey has been helping that business transform. You know, we uh came out of the WPP group about three and a half, four years ago now, and we're going through our own investment journey with uh Bain Capital um and and coming out over the other end as a an even more efficient, beautiful beast, uh best you know, with a real platform for growth.

SPEAKER_03 3:21

Hey, it sounds like it's an exciting time, and we we did touch quite a bit on transformation last time, but uh one of the topics that we were we were chatting at just before we started the podcast was all about how things are different, because it does feel like we're in a completely different economic environment than they were just 18 months ago, and and the bit I I still can't get my head around is how fast it's changed. And so be interesting to see like what are some of the changes that you've seen and felt within um you know, within the economic space, and how has that impacted um how you see finance and how you're reacting within finance?

SPEAKER_04 3:56

I think one of one of the first things, we've always known cash is king, right? But the reality is that with the current interest rate environment, cash flow has never been more important than ever ever before. And so many organizations and uh uh around the world have become very heavily reliant on low, low interest debt uh and and leverage-based growth. And the reality is a lot of that debt is coming up for refinancing now, and all of a sudden that is hitting companies' ability to trade, let alone further fuel growth. What we're seeing, because of the way our organization works, we are very plugged in to many organizations in many countries. So we are uh we get a really good inside track barometer of where the economy is at right now. And what we're seeing right now is there a lot of the lead indicators, and I think lead versus lag is probably a topic we should talk about later, but the lead indicators indicate sadly a a recession's coming and a global a global recession. And I know a lot of the uh economic comments would like you to believe that we've turned a corner. That's not what we're seeing. And and and what we're we're seeing on a regular basis now is that there's a real landscape change in the way organizations are their attitude toward money and their investment cycle. So a good example is we're seeing a shift toward bite size. So uh historically, if a piece of work used to run for 12 months of the year, dividing it up into four, for example, and repitching all four of those. So you've got to get used to a world where you might not win one of the four. And and that for me really speaks to the UK supermarket scene 15 years ago. So where you had your one big monthly shop and you were brand loyal to whichever blue, green, orange, yellow, uh, dark green brand that you particularly liked at the time. Over time we shifted toward the weekly convenience shop. Um, and and you know, I I was at St. Bosanna and Asda at the uh at the time. You knew you weren't going to get all those baskets. So that is very that is a very clear trend now. And on top of that, the nice there's a a much more ruthless approach to nice to haves versus must-haves. And the space and the market for nice to have's has dried up significantly. Because that's the sacrifices that are being made right now for organizations to have comfort in their immediate term. There's definitely it's definitely a change in landscape.

SPEAKER_03 6:38

And it's and it's interesting, and and and I think, you know, I think that's one of the challenges is actually how as um individuals in finance do we get or start getting visibility and access to, like you say, those leading indicators versus the lagging? Because by the time you've got into lag, it's in some ways it can be too late. So so let's so what does that mean for for how we should approach the the finance aspect? What what to what should CFOs be considering and thinking about given those indicators um and what you just said?

SPEAKER_04 7:12

I think one of the basics is uh is the importance of scenario planning. And so I I've said this a few times recently. I've been lucky enough to do a bit of the speaking circuit. And I have an opinion, which seems to be shared by the community, that scenario planning historically was intellectual stroking. You know, it was a it was a trapdoor mechanism for here's what I want to present, and here's uh an upside and a downside versus that, which are too unrealistic that you're gonna land on what I want to present. Yeah. So scenario planning didn't massively have a real place in the world. But what we're what we're certainly what I'm now recommending, um, and I I am seeing this across a lot of other people, is that scenario planning now has a place. You almost want to have three different ranges. You want um an ambition level, which you set your company goals toward, you have a realism level, which you set your annual budgets toward, and you have a prudence level, which you set your cash flow forecasts based on. And I think if you f follow that three-stage philosophy, you're gonna be okay, broadly speaking. Whether that leads to perpetual scenario planning and the concept of integrated business planning, that's an organizational choice. But the critical thing is this is consensus-led as well. I don't I don't think we can have a navel gacing um view of scenario planning anymore. It has to be a handheld poreprint on this across the organization. And and I think that way you can at least give yourself a little bit of wiggle room.

SPEAKER_03 8:57

And the challenge I think a lot of CFOs are have is that you know, there is a huge amount of ambition that comes from the CEO, that comes from the sales director, and depending on where you're at in your funding cycle, sometimes the investors as well. So, how how do you look at, or how do you think about balancing some of sometimes the competing priorities or other influences on the planning cycle with, like you say, the the realism aspect and and making sure that it's it's something that is achievable?

SPEAKER_04 9:33

I um my philosophy is that it has to be achievable. I I don't believe in budgeting uh based on hope. I I just don't I don't think you can get there. I think context is also a critical element to take into consideration here. So back in the retail sector, the grocery retail sector 15 years ago again, we were the the key thing we talked about actually it wasn't our own growth, it was the IGD, the industry grow growth differential. So it's all very well and good looking at your own results and saying, I grew by 4%, hey, high five, or I grew by 10%, or I went backwards by 1% this one. What actually mattered was what was the sum of the market doing, and therefore what was your delta versus that? So if you grew by 4% and the marketplace grew by 2%, you've outperformed by 2%. That's a good performance. If you've gone, uh if you've grown by four and the market did 10, you're minus six, and actually you've left money on the table. And I I think that kind of wider lens and keeping your tentacles out there and knowing what's going on in the marketplace is essential to bring someone on a journey. Um I feel too often there's still a focus on putting your truth out there, which is incredibly integrity-led, and hoping it sticks in the boardroom sometimes. The reality is it's not what's said, it's what's heard. Um, and you you know, having the right to say I told you so months later is pointless. It doesn't help anybody. So I think you've got to bring people on that journey as to why this is your recommendation because it's the the right path to follow.

SPEAKER_03 11:19

Gosh, there's so much in that short sentence that we need to explore. So let's just start with the the core piece. So you talked about obviously using the market as your delta, as your your point of comparative. Where would you normally go to access that kind of information? You know, because we remember we've got finance individuals from small businesses all the way up to large enterprise listening in. So what are your recommendations or or ways to understand how other companies of your size and industry are performing?

SPEAKER_04 11:51

I think it it depend absolutely depends on your sector and and and the size of your organization. And I don't want this to be an advert, but when I was in the retail space, we actually used Canta. So Canta policed, um not police, but published that data and own that data. That isn't the case for all industries. Um so it entirely depends on your your space. I think a lot of medium plus size companies will have some level of competition that are probably listed in some form. Um now it's not always easy to pick out if you've got more of a divisional lens, the direct comparable part of that. But it's it you can usually get one or two proxies for how you're performing versus somebody else. It gets a lot harder when you get smaller and more boutique. I get that. I I entirely get that. But that's where I think the power of networking comes in. I I find that if you have a peer-to-peer conversation, people are relatively open. They're not giving you anything particularly confidential, but they'll they'll give you enough to get a sense of their direction of travel as well. And sometimes that's that's enough. All you want to know deep down is contextually, are we walking the right path?

SPEAKER_03 13:07

Yeah, and could we could we have done better? Could we have, you know, are we above where we need to be? Um, and asking yourself that question.

Getting The Message Heard

SPEAKER_04 13:15

Exactly.

SPEAKER_03 13:16

And in terms of you said an interesting concept, an interesting uh comment there about what you're saying is not necessarily what is heard. And I and I think that is a really, really valuable uh statement. So let's just dig into that. You know, how do you manage um that challenge, you know, in terms of what you're putting forward is not necessarily either what's digested or either what's understood or what's wanted to be heard, I think is sometimes the case.

SPEAKER_04 13:48

Absolutely. I think this goes back to who are we in our DNA. Historically, the finance person is probably a slightly shy, introverted, and analytical human, um, and therefore isn't the one that wants to be jumping up and down on a on a soapbox trying to dominate an MDC or salesperson Um who's far more bullish and will want to win their battle ultimately. The historical way has been present your compelling case, put it out there, but don't you almost don't own the end outcome. You know, your your job has finished at that point. I and I see that as utterly an unacceptable outcome. You know, you're you're j y it's like you being in a restaurant cooking a meal and then failing to let it leave the kitchen. You know, you've done all the hard work, but you've got none of the outcome that you're and the objective that you're looking for in the first place. So it for me it's about personal accountability. You know, you you have a and storytelling helps, by the way, uh, you know, as a as a comms style, but you have an obligation to try several different routes of articulating the same thing if it isn't if the message isn't landing. Um so yeah, that that's certainly what I do. Now you can help by social strategies, by picking people off in advance, etc. etc. But the reality is in the room it's then, it's speak then or forever hold your peace, because yeah, that is your obligation, is that you have to ensure the message is understood.

SPEAKER_03 15:31

And I think it's an interesting piece about, like you say, there's the you know, and I think intentionally or unintentionally, like you say, there there can be a um uh an overly positive attitude to to the market, to the outcomes potentially that are coming forwards. Um and have you got any strategies that you've used in the past to control those that those conversations, like you say, having uh not not blindsiding people having conversations prior, or is there anything else that any sort of top tips you've got for where you've got a particularly uh overly ambitious individual within your wider executive team that you've had to manage through?

SPEAKER_04 16:12

Yeah, a few times well when I worked in FMCG, um we had sales and operational planning, which evolved into integrated business planning. And the beauty of that is it's consensus, but it's documented. So what you're capturing is effectively people's predictions. So as long as you've got as long as you've got the process in place to review and learn and iterate, you're able to over time quickly build up a bank of who's good at forecasting and who's not. So you can almost have a delta factor, a beta factor rather, which will dumb up or dumb down someone's uh prediction calls. And in theory, it improves over time. So it's the way we did it was not very algorithmic, it was a bit quite manual. But I think up now you would have some level of software input that would help you uh achieve that more accurate forecast over time. And I think that eliminates this uh anecdotal philosophy, you know, like the car salesman, this is how it's always been, I know best because I once sold a a KIR in 1993. That's not acceptable anymore.

Integrated Business Planning Beyond Products

SPEAKER_03 17:22

So let's explore that topic. So tell us about integrated business planning and what how you've seen it work well.

SPEAKER_04 17:33

For us, um I'm going back to my pharmaceutical days here, but sales SNRP in in its heart was really about boxes at that time. So it works better in physical product environment, but it was it was a forecasting tool for making sure you produced the right boxes, got it to the right warehouse and got it to the right retail at the right time, and and you were able to support any peaks or troughs in demand based on commercial activity in store or whatever whatever it may be. Yes, you then often go as far as putting a revenue dollar on it, and and sometimes you might even go as far as going as far as gross margin. But where I got to was there is nothing that isn't copy and pastable to the entire organization here. You know, it's good discipline to divide up your entire P ⁇ L and have clear management team accountability on every part, every single element of that. Um, whether it's payroll is I don't know, the CHRO or you know, the whatever whatever it may be. And then you have a clear finance business partner man marker for each of those. Um and and at the end of the day, SNRP really is just a a monthly meeting to review your actuals and your forward forecasts. You can apply that to anything. So we we evolved that more to an integrated business planning concept, which is just doing the same thing, really. But what that gives you is a you know a consensus-based risk-y-nops-adjusted full PL on a perpetual basis. That directly you can almost do scenario planning on the back of that to give you your annual plans or your re cross-wheel reforecast. But then we even took it a bit further and thought, do you know what? It's only a bit of mathematical formulae here to give you a cash flow forecast on the as well. And the beauty of that is that you've got a cash flow forecast that's directly based on the P ⁇ L. It's not a separately generated piece of work. So that that was a piece of work slash IP that took about three years to evolve, but it was really successful for us, and I've continued to use it to an extent throughout the rest of my career so far. And hopefully we'll continue to do so thereafter, unless, you know, um Chat GPT replaced my concept, which probably can do.

SPEAKER_03 19:55

It's scary what some of the new technology can do. But and I think it'll be an interesting conversation to have in the next couple of years as to, you know, how it helps us build those models and how how and or just isn't importantly, how it helps us adjust those models like more dynamically, because that's the that's always the challenge, isn't it? Is the speed of getting to the end result is sometimes the issue. And absolutely and so with that framework then, so are you you obviously mentioned it was more product focused. How have you applied that in a less product and more you know people-based environment?

SPEAKER_04 20:32

So one of my previous roles before Cantar was in a management consultancy. Um and and it worked it worked just as well there. Even though you're talking humans, labor age utilization rates, uh, client projects, ex uh associates versus employees, etc., it's the same thing still works. You've got the work that you know about and the likely resource adjustments you have to make to fulfill that to the right level. You've got work, you've got your CRM pipeline that you think will probably land at any point in the future. So as long as your revenue officer, your commercial officer, your MD hold hands on that prediction, prediction of win rates, etc., you've got a decent understanding from your ops person of the resource required to fulfill, you can you can still apply the same concepts, uh, even in a professional service environment. So I I honestly think it works. Um it it's it's just a it's just this philosophical scenario. It is scenario planning at the end of the day, but it's handheld. It's not a finance only piece of work.

SPEAKER_03 21:45

So I always find it really hard to explain to people why they should choose ITAS as their financial transformation or stage partner. So rather than me tell you how awesome we are, I'm gonna let our customers do it.

SPEAKER_02 21:58

So we decided to go with ITASK because when we were looking for a partner, we felt that they not only took the time to understand our business and they knew the needs of everyone on the team or everyone that would be using the system, but they also were very transparent in kind of what they could do, what they couldn't do. And prior to having us, you know, sign anything or make any agreements, they held meetings with us to walk them through our processes and our business so that they really understood everything that would need to be done and give give us realistic timelines as well. And another thing was because we were so new and we didn't have a current system going, um, we were looking for something that we could implement rather quickly, but also do it correctly. And we felt that ITAS would be able to do achieve both of those in terms of yeah, understanding our business and implementing it how we wanted it, but also doing it in our rather quick timeline.

SPEAKER_03 23:00

And and how do you incorporate? So obviously, you know, if you've got a fairly short forecast window, absolutely CRM is the way to go, unless you've got some incredibly quick deal cycles. But what about um on an extended, like where you know you need to look at a more extended forecast, maybe a six to twelve month window? How did you manage and support that?

SPEAKER_04 23:24

Well, that's where I think data mining and having the more robust toolkit uh is more appropriate because you are starting to get more into the second guessing scenario. Uh and and anecdote will never be as good as data science. And I think data science is probably an interesting theme to explore in its own right because it's becoming ever more important in literally everything. Uh and and in fact, I'd say it's all we're starting to get to a a stage where data science is becoming a threat, I think, to commercial finance individuals. So over over time, the world of finance business partner specifically, data science, consultants, MBAs, they're all converging at the same time toward who gives the best advice based on the data in front of me. Um so I I think that's certainly something to be wary of. But ultimately, yeah, I think a long-term sales cycle, a long-term you know, CRM pipeline, it's still crunching predictive data and then flowing it through non-pipes.

SPEAKER_03 24:43

And that uh predictive data is based on the current, potentially the current economic climate. And if you think about how um our current our current climate is versus 18 months ago, that's an incredibly fast turnaround. So, how did you manage some of the volatility in the market alongside that integrated planning model?

Real-Time KPIs And Fast Corrections

SPEAKER_04 25:07

Good that is a very good question. Um we are trying, I say we, and by that I mean specifically Canta, but we are trying to make a big switch toward real-time data. I think this is really the lead lag question as well, to an extent as well. So traditionally, the lag measures are things like the PL, right? Um the GDP, it's it's kind of a statement of record looking backwards. I don't feel they're particularly fit for purpose anymore. Uh I think we're we're now living in a world of real-time KPI dashboards with A-B testing and live in the moment cost corrective action. Clear, uh RASCI, um, people on dashboards, controls and checks, balances that ladder up to other people, and eventually, if enough things go wrong that look like this over enough time and they pass through enough layers, a red light appears on the CEO's dashboard. But it's the speed of getting to that red light. I think that's wildly different to where we were in the past. And that's a very good thing. But a lot of organizations have to evolve a lot for that not to be a manual process. And so bad news needs to sweep upwards way quicker than it ever has in the past. And it feels a little bit like a like a NASA control room, it is what an organization needs to look like now. You need a team of data scientists all looking at a very specific thing which is algorithmically generated, but it's it's throwing out the odd outlier every now and then that needs investigating. And the idea here is if you're an astronaut going from the moon, you're not gonna realize you're gonna suddenly see the moon, but if you're off by half a degree, you're not gonna realize for a day, quite frankly. By which point you're my math is probably terrible here, but you're potentially a hundred thousand miles off, of course. You need one person looking at the third decimal place of degrees to realise that within 10 minutes and cost-correct. And that's where businesses need to be now.

SPEAKER_03 27:16

And that I'm gonna be honest, that exact thing. So I I feel like I've been banging the drum for real-time data and visibility, and and I love the way you summed up the the reason why it's so critical in today's environment. And and and I I genuinely could not have said it better myself in terms of the why. And I think you've really put it into context. I think the challenge for a lot of um companies, I guess, is is making that shift into that real-time uh data. And like you say, you know, and and but that's what excites me about AI. So, and again, um I you know, having had lots of conversations with some of the technology and some of the AI labs that are sitting behind even like the most commonly used platforms, you know, finance platforms, like what they are doing with AI to kind of drive that course correction and alert is incredible. Because their data sets that they're holding is massive because they're not they're not looking at one company's data. They're you know, they're analyzing data from multiple entities, from multiple organizations in multiple industries. And um, obviously it's all anonymized, but it is it's an exciting, exciting piece right now.

SPEAKER_04 28:34

It it it it is, but there is there's good data sets and there's bad data sets. Big big data is divided potentially into two sub buckets, and and I think a lot of the a lot of companies don't necessarily realize they've got bad data sets. Uh so it the data science foundation you need in place to do some of this stuff needs to be really organized and policed, quite frankly. Uh, you need you you need to have such a clear vision of what the end reporting and KPIs need to look like, therefore working backwards how each transaction needs to be tagged in which ERP, around the world, etc., in order to have comparable and meaningful data at the other side. Because otherwise it's rubbish in, rubbish out. And that's that's a journey we've personally been on. We have multiple ERP systems where we've got the same ERP system, we might have multiple instances of that ARP system. We have optional, we've historically, in some instances, had optional fields, and that makes meaningful data science really challenging on the other side. So it's been a big journey for us to try and correct that. Uh somehow that's kind of forced its way across my my desk.

SPEAKER_03 29:53

Um I wonder why, James.

SPEAKER_04 29:56

I wonder why we need to make it happen. Yeah, well, you need a you need a passion for it though, uh, I guess. And I do I do have a passion for this.

SPEAKER_03 30:05

Well, let's talk about that. Because I think, if you don't mind, that's a really interesting conversation to explore because I talk about data hygiene. I literally did a session this morning um on exactly that concept. So um talk about how you approach the cleaning up data when you know, obviously, once you've got a clear outcome in terms of a reporting pack that you need to produce or a you know, a type of report that you need to produce, how do you go about assessing the quality of the data and then working through to make sure that you get that data where it needs to be?

SPEAKER_04 30:40

I I tend to start with what the it's like um a business I used to work with in the past had a concept called future back. And future back is as simple as it sounds. It's think about what you it needs to look like when it's perfect, and then do your sequential steps because if you go the other way, you're gonna end up with some weird hybrid that's never gonna actually get you there, and you're just gonna be disappointed. So for me, it's all about agreeing with all stakeholders. Again, it's kind of an integrated planning consensus concept. Agree with all stakeholders. Is this the suite of reports? Is this the various cuts of data you're ever gonna want? Whether it's a domain domain split of revenue, a type of revenue between gross net, discounts, whatever it may be. Is it um intercompany versus external? Is it what split of external have you got? Do you need do you need industries in there? You know, you have to go through that painful moment. And everyone looks at you like you've got three heads at that time. Like, why do they care this much about well we'll work it out? The reality is you don't have time to work it out because all of this has to exist at the moment a transaction's keyed. That's that's your key moment, and you can never retrospectively, or it's incredibly inefficient to retrospectively tag these things. So it all has to be done at the single moment in time when you receive that API from a c a customer or a salesperson key something, whatever it may be, that's the moment you have to win. So is that in the finance remit? Uh no. But I if I want this to be clean and meaningful, I have to have a passion for that being right in the first place. Um I'm not sure I answered the question there, but yeah, if for me it's all about getting having that clear vision, having your quite frankly, your house in order. Otherwise, you've got just foundational sands.

SPEAKER_03 32:44

And I think if I maybe sum up, because I always think in framework, so for me it's a clear definition of the reporting requirement. And oh my gosh, the amount of conversations I've gone into in just basic, like talking about charts of accounts. And people build charts of accounts from it's a bit like zero-based budgeting. I'm a big believer, and you start with the end goal and you build your chart accounts from that with the you know, the reporting requirement, and then you you sort of assess it against what you expect, you know, what a typical chart of account looks like to make sure you haven't missed anything. Um, but that's for me is a classic example of, like you say, future back. I like that phrase. Um I might uh I might borrow that. I hope there's no IP around that. I like it.

SPEAKER_04 33:25

Um there is there is actually shall I call them out and acknowledge it now?

SPEAKER_03 33:29

Uh yeah, absolutely.

SPEAKER_04 33:31

Okay, that's from the Egamont group, who are a management global management consultancy. Um fantastic piece of work they did. So shout out to Sean Connolly and the team.

SPEAKER_03 33:40

Absolutely, love that. So that's a great way of thinking through. So I always say start with the end in mind, less catchy, but same concept. So um thinking through your reporting requirements, then defining your inputs, and and then what you're saying is then assessing those inputs to ensure that they are clean enough to deliver on the reporting requirement and in the right format with the right level of data. And it's really interesting that you say about it needs to be right at the beginning. Um, because like you say, you know, I think that's a really important piece. And if it's not exactly right at the beginning, making sure you've got enough data to manage the allocational data correction process in the background, that's where things get interesting. So love that as a framework and a concept and something for everyone to think about um when they're when they're going in. So kind of going back to what we were talking about in terms of integrated business planning and dealing with this really volatile environment. Is there anything else that you're you're considering in your role about how you ensure the you know the stability, I guess, and the accuracy of the forecasting and planning that you're doing?

SPEAKER_04 34:53

One of the things I'm trying to push our finance leadership team to do is position themselves more as business people. So I think as the role evolves now, I would try to argue, successfully or otherwise, that we are now business people with a finance background. And and when you become business people with a finance background, I think there is a moment in time, a bit like they seek forgiveness thing, own your own your truth. I think there is a moment in time where you have to switch toward proactivity. So historically, again, I would argue finance were a bit reactive. It was a business has seen something, business comes to finance with questions, finance delivers a brilliant answer, business goes away and cracks on. I I would argue that that's not acceptable anymore. Um it finance has to be second-guessing what's going to be happening all the time, and finance has to take the lead in already delivering a solution before the businesses even realize it's a problem. And and that very much is a seek forgiveness, not permission philosophy. But for me, that is what true leadership is all about. You know, that kind of attitude, then I think inherent within that is a make it happen attitude. Uh, you know, it I again I feel finance historically were asked, here's something exciting I would like to do. Crunch the numbers, does it add up? I'm not that interested in that way of thinking. I'm more interested in a here's something the business would like to do, right? What needs to be true for us to make this bring bring this to fruition? You know, do we have to remodel it? Do we have to renegotiate? Do we have to you know, let's let's find a way. That's a far more energizing way of working. So I think it's more of a culture, it's a cultural transition actually, to make all this happen now. And it's something I'm really passion, I'm passionate about this because I just find it interesting. It drives me more. I'm building, I'm building a business rather than adding the numbers up for a business.

SPEAKER_03 37:02

And that is inherently I agree with you. Oh, yeah. Way more exciting and interesting, I think. But so what does that change in terms of the skill set that fine like your team need? Because that anticipatory mindset, like you see, spotting the problems before exists, it does mean moving away from, like we said, the lagging indicators which we're looking at, which is PL and looking more at the data forms that perhaps we're not as comfortable with and seeing what else is happening operationally within the business.

SPEAKER_04 37:34

It I think you it is a huge requirement for EK, quite frankly, now. You know, we we have a responsibility to be the holder of the truth now, and what that means is you need to be broadly aware of everything across an organization. You you need your tentacles everywhere, but you also need to be able to understand genuinely what you're looking at. So I I I tend to recruit people, and I find it I find it really hard to articulate it's better, but I tend to recruit people that just get it. You know, they just understand how a business fits together like that, and that is worth a thousand technical points, quite frankly. You know, just just fundamentally understanding it, and once they're deeply integrated within a business, they will hear everything, they will see everything, they will challenge in the moment, report, report back and bring bring new ideas. So that that's kind of where I'm trying to go with this is I don't know, I feel like business partner is the wrong phrase now. I don't know what the right phrase is, by the way. But the the next evolution of this is a business person that um that happens to have some level of reporting requirement along the way.

SPEAKER_03 38:59

Yeah, and and and and I think business business partner in some ways doesn't because there's such different varying skills, I think, within those that have that title, that's an interesting piece, isn't it, as well. And and maybe within the concept of a business partner, finance business partner, we need almost a subset of specialisms depending on uh the individual.

SPEAKER_04 39:23

But yeah, um I think but but it's it's it's emotional intelligence, right? It's it's about understanding the human against you, or not against you, opposite you, and playing the playing the person, not the cards, in in a lot of instances. And and that requires storytelling, it requires adaptability, um potentially charisma to an extent, uh potentially strength. None of these are things you study with um SEMA, ACA, ACCA. These are not technical skills, period. These are soft skills. But I think the that they're far more important to the ultimate success of your career than they ever were previously.

Recruiting For Values And EQ

SPEAKER_03 40:08

And I guess the question is, right, without put sitting them down and making all the candidates play a game of poker, um, how do you assess that skill set? How do you um find, how do you personally do it? Because you said you just get find people that just get it. How do you assess whether they get it?

SPEAKER_04 40:27

I invest a lot of time in my relationship with my recruiters, first and foremost. So they get what makes my DNA uh and and my finance ecosystems. Beyond that, I expect mainly the CVs to be quite homogenous, quite frankly. So an interview really is uh is talking to a human and trying to spot them. I'm also a big believer in the interview process having a lot of different stakeholders, specifically of various levels. Because I I'm super interested to know how someone interacts with someone that would report to them in an interview process. I also am particularly interested to know how the individual on the front desk is treated by that person. Uh and then I will compare that to how they talk to the ultimate CEO in that interview. And if if there is an inconsistency, period, they're they're not the one. You know, it's a but it's a human values thing. But they just don't clearly don't have their red ass switched on to what the scenario is here.

Transparency Tips And Final Takeaways

SPEAKER_03 41:38

That's super interesting. I think a lot of a lot of finance teams, that the bit that lets them down isn't that they have the right ideas, they know what they want from a finance person, but they don't quite get the the recruitment right. And I maybe that is a whole um series in itself in terms of recruitment on that. So um I'm very aware that this time has just disappeared as I thought it might, James. Um and as it did last time, can I just say? Um so for those that are listening, there's obviously been some brilliant insights from you. And I think just hearing the pr how you practically apply some of these big concepts that we all hear and talk about has been incredibly useful. But if you had to give some top tips to those looking to maybe revaluate, reevaluate their, you know, their planning framework and look to implement a more robust planning process, what what would those top tips be?

SPEAKER_04 42:34

Good question. I think whatever your framework and frequency, I think make it repeatable, make it transparent. And specifically, I'd really double down on transparency, actually. So one of my philosophical things is I want absolutely no sandbagging anywhere in the organization. Because once you've got that, you end up with layers of it, and quite frankly, again, rubbish in, rubbish out. I've got nothing I can work with on the CEO. I can't make make any informed investment decisions. So I think double down on the concept of transparency, build a track record on the back of that of you show me your truth, and I will never beat you up for that, up or down. I think that's really, really important. You know, you following through on that level of transparency and being aware of the shadow you cast as a leader is is really important on that. Other than that, I think yeah, it's a good question. I think it concentrate on hearing what the question was. Uh in terms of you've asked me to build a PL forecast, uh a business case, whatever it may be, that looks like this. Truly ask yourself is this going to lead to the outcome they actually want? Because I again I s I see sometimes too many business cases that are written through the lens of it's Historically we needed to hit 5x ROI across with this payback cycle. And they're just utterly deluded versus the reality of the business today. The the world has moved on. So I think you've gotta get how what you're putting together fits in contextually. So but but also I like I like I like the that uh three-stage scenario planning of you know um ambition, realism and prudence. Um I it it works nicely for me. Might not work for everybody, but it it it certainly works for me.

SPEAKER_03 44:35

And what I like about it is it's clearly defined and simple. I I think there is a tendency in some of the budgeting cycles I've seen for, as you say, a lack of transparency or sandbagging is uh incredibly prevalent, and that doesn't do anybody any favours. You know, you'll you have to unpick it at some point. Um you might as well do it um at the beginning when you're putting together your cash flow forecast. Um, but also I like the the simplicity of the model um and uh that that three-step process. So thank you again, James. Genuinely appreciate your time, and I'm sure our listeners do as well. And and to our listeners, um, if you feel like I missed a question, you want to go deeper into any of the topics we talked about today, because we have talked about a lot, um, as James and I have a tendency to do, um, then please do reach out and ask. And um, James, if if people want to learn more about um about Cantar and and also about you know yourself, um, where's the best place to find you?

SPEAKER_04 45:35

Uh so I'm quite active on LinkedIn. Um, so if you type James Owen SEMA, almost certainly I'm gonna be the uh the one that you you find. Uh there's not many of us out there. Um Cantar is uh Cantar.com, K-A-N-T-A-R. Uh, we work with a lot of the uh the world's largest companies.

SPEAKER_03 45:54

Amazing. And um for anybody listening, as usual, we'll put all of those links into the show notes to make it easy for you to find and uh put together. So thank you again, James. Um, and thank you for sharing your your insight, your knowledge, and the the lessons that you've learned over the years. So it's great to it's great to hear and some really actionable tips for our listeners to take away. So thank you.

Sponsor: Find Your Sage Product

SPEAKER_00 46:15

No problem. Thank you very much for inviting me again. Hey Google, what's the best accounting software for my business? Give it a couple of years, and I bet you she'll be able to answer you pretty accurately. But for now, it's still one of the few questions Google can't give you an answer for. But we can. Take our free quiz and find out which Sage products is the right fit for your business. Just head to itasolutions.co.uk