The concept of Rolling Forecast is a hot topic in Financial Planning & Analysis at the moment. Many companies attempt to implement it, but not all of them are successful. Statistics suggest that one in five of the organisations that implemented Rolling Forecasts recently have since abandoned them because they proved to be more complex than initially expected. Additionally, they didn’t find enough value in this tool to continue using it.

However, Rolling Forecast can be a powerful tool for FP&A if used correctly. 

Over the course of my career, I have implemented a number of Rolling Forecasts: there were both success stories and lessons to learn. These seven success factors were discussed at length at 7 AFP FP&A Clubs that I ran in Europe and the Middle East. They were also presented to a group of around 400 FP&A professionals at the 2013 AFP Annual Conference in Las Vegas. The concept was also deliberated with International FP&A Board members, many CFOs and with several FP&A Directors of global corporations during my years of FP&A travels.

1. Culture: The starting point for the successful Rolling Forecast is an organisation’s business culture. Successful implementation requires support from top management and acceptance by key participants. All parties must understand that Rolling Forecast is not a measurement but a management tool. It should not follow accounting structures.

2. People: The next crucial factor for successful Rolling Forecast is people. Talent in FP&A, in particular, is essential for individuals working with Rolling Forecast. They should be good communicators with analytical skills who can see the ‘big picture’ and possess the ability to build models.

3. Models and systems: Four in five organisations continue to use Excel for FP&A. Attempting to produce Rolling Forecast for a multimillion or multibillion-dollar company in Excel is almost impossible. Models and systems are essential and should be driver-based to make it easier to plan different scenarios and forecast quickly. Systems should be flexible and tailored to FP&A. Many companies evidently still attempt to do this in Excel, but Excel is prone to mistakes and can be one of the reasons why Rolling Forecast is unsuccessful.

4. Process: Processes should be quick and flexible and allow collaboration while minimising non-value-adding activities. This takes time, effort and education; a company I was previously with could not improve its process because the operational calendar was created three years earlier. Standardisation and modern systems can help improve processes; it is up to FP&A to make sure these are implemented.

5. Design: It is important to understand the level of detail needed in Rolling Forecast. It should be timely and should allow for action. The forecast should contain the minimum amount of data to understand what drives the future. Only forecasts that are based on drivers and assumptions are actionable. We should not use conventional accounting data structures because they do not explain why and, therefore, are not actionable.

6. Alignment: Typically, companies have three planning processes: Strategic planning, where everything begins; Business planning, where most FP&A people are working; and Operation planning, which provides input to the business plan. Alignment and communication between these different planning processes are vital for successful Rolling Forecast.

7. Participation: The forecasting process involves so many different people, both financial and non-financial. It is up to FP&A practitioners to be business partners and teach non-financial people what drivers and systems to use. There is a gap between strategy and execution at many organisations; involving many departments in the planning process can help to overcome this problem. However, while participation is important, FP&A professionals must also ensure that the process does not become too crowded.

Drawbacks and Challenges

Naturally, there are drawbacks to using Rolling Forecast. The preparation process can be costly and time-consuming if they are not automated since a forecast is reviewed and updated several times per year and is too complex for accountants without sufficient training. Constant forecasting throughout the year can also lead to an increase in managers’ workload. Coordination of profit centres can decrease due to the lack of one common budget. Lastly, a performance evaluation will be more challenging to carry out.

Rolling Forecasting vs. Budgeting

Many studies present Rolling Forecast as the main alternative to budgets. Beyond Budgeting, propagators view budgets as static, cumbersome and time-consuming, creating little value for an organisation. Alternatively, Rolling Forecast and a combination of other performance management tools are said to improve the performance management process.

However, even with Rolling Forecast, most companies are unlikely to eliminate the budget altogether. Budgets are often required by external agencies and financial institutions. They may also be needed for target setting and performance bonuses. One approach is just to nominate one Rolling Forecast, which covers the required periods, to be called the budget.

For example, the rolling 18-month forecast produced in November will include the whole of the following year and the relevant periods could be copied to create the budget for the following year. This may be subject to additional review and approval steps but would not require the investment in time that was previously dedicated to the standalone budget process.

Conclusion

The planning process based on Rolling Forecast is quick, dynamic and forward-looking. This tool provides better results over the traditional forecasting process. Implemented correctly, Rolling Forecast expands planning horizons and quickly informs decision-makers about future risks and profitable outcomes.

This article was first published on http://www.gtnews.com 

and http://www.afponline.org/