Head of FP&A Guide:
Shared Services & GBS

When selecting the technology stack to support your GBS FP&A transformation, neutrality and integration are paramount. The market is flooded with vendors, but for a Head of FP&A, the decision often comes down to architecture strategy: Platform vs. Best-of-Breed.

1. The Platform Approach (CPM/EPM Suites)

These are comprehensive Corporate Performance Management platforms that handle everything from consolidation to planning and reporting.

• Pros: Single source of truth, unified metadata, easier governance.

• Cons: Can be expensive and rigid; implementation timelines are often 12+ months.

• Best for: Mature GBS organizations needing rigorous statutory reporting and complex consolidations across multiple geographies.

2. The Orchestration & Intake Layer

This is a newer category of tools specifically designed for Shared Services to manage service delivery and intake *before* data hits the ERP.

• Pros: Solves the 'opaque demand' problem; improves customer experience; rapid implementation (3-6 months).

• Cons: Requires integration with core finance systems to be fully effective.

• Best for: Organizations struggling with 'who is doing what' and wanting to improve service level agreements (SLAs).

3. Point Solutions (Niche Tools)

Tools specialized for specific tasks like Account Reconciliation, Lease Accounting, or Workforce Planning.

• Pros: Best-in-class functionality for specific pain points; quick wins.

• Cons: 'Integration Debt'—you end up maintaining dozens of API connections.

• Best for: Fixing a specific, burning fire (e.g., a broken reconciliation process) without overhauling the entire stack.

Build vs. Buy Considerations

• Build (Custom SQL/PowerApps): Only recommended if your process is truly unique and provides a competitive advantage. Maintenance usually becomes a nightmare when the original developer leaves.

• Buy (SaaS): The standard for 95% of GBS functions. Look for vendors with specific 'Shared Services' templates, not just generic finance tools.

Evaluation Checklist

When vetting vendors, ask these specific questions:

1. Connectivity: "Do you have native connectors to our specific ERP instances (e.g., SAP S/4HANA, Oracle NetSuite)?"

2. Scalability: "Can this handle the transaction volume of all our regions combined without latency?"

3. Self-Service: "Can my FP&A team modify reports and models without calling IT?" (Crucial for agility).

4. AI Reality: "Show me the actual AI use case running in production, not on a roadmap." (Look for anomaly detection and predictive forecasting).

FAQs

What is the typical ROI timeline for a GBS FP&A transformation?

While full maturity can take 18-24 months, you should expect to see 'Quick Wins' within the first 3-6 months. By automating high-volume manual reporting (Phase 1), organizations often reclaim 10-15% of analyst capacity immediately. The hard financial ROI—driven by working capital improvements and headcount avoidance—typically crystallizes between months 9 and 12 as driver-based forecasting improves decision quality. According to Hackett Group research, world-class GBS organizations operate at nearly half the cost of their peers, validating the long-term ROI.

How do we handle resistance from regional teams who want to keep their own spreadsheets?

Resistance usually stems from a fear of losing control or a belief that 'our region is unique.' Address this by adopting a 'Glocal' approach: standardize the *platforms* and *data definitions* (Global), but allow for configurable *views* and *reports* that address local statutory needs (Local). Involve regional leads in the design phase (Phase 1) rather than dictating the solution. Show them that the new system eliminates their low-value data scrubbing work, freeing them to be strategic advisors.

Do we need to hire data scientists to implement AI in FP&A?

Not necessarily. The modern trend in FP&A software is 'Democratized AI' or 'Embedded AI.' Leading platforms now come with built-in predictive algorithms that finance professionals can configure without coding (e.g., auto-detecting seasonality or outliers). However, you *do* need team members with 'Data Fluency'—people who understand how to interpret statistical outputs and identify when a model is drifting. Focus on upskilling your curious analysts rather than competing for scarce data scientists.

Should we build a custom solution or buy a SaaS platform?

For 95% of GBS organizations, 'Buy' is the correct strategy. Custom builds (building your own data warehouse and front-end) often fail due to maintenance burden and lack of agility. SaaS platforms dedicated to xP&A and GBS management offer best-practice templates out of the box, regular security updates, and faster innovation cycles. Build only if your business model is so unique that no commercial software can support it—which is rare in Finance/HR/IT operations.

How does this impact our Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with the business?

Transformation should move you from 'Activity-Based SLAs' (e.g., 'respond to ticket in 4 hours') to 'Outcome-Based SLAs' (e.g., 'improve forecast accuracy to 95%'). A unified intake and reporting system allows you to measure these outcomes transparently. This shifts the relationship from a vendor-client dynamic to a strategic partnership, where SLAs are shared goals rather than just penalties for failure.

What role does 'Intake' play in financial planning?

Intake is the 'Leading Indicator' of financial performance in GBS. If you know that IT is receiving a 30% spike in 'New User Setup' requests, you can predict a downstream increase in software license costs and helpdesk volume *before* the month-end close. Without unified intake, you are forecasting based on historicals (lagging indicators). Intake data provides the real-time pulse required for accurate driver-based forecasting.