Published in: Uncategorised

Why CFOs Are Moving to Unified EPM Platforms

Executive summary: Finance leaders are consolidating planning, consolidation, reporting, and analytics onto unified EPM platforms to win on speed, signal quality, and control. The shift is fueled by volatility, real-time decision needs, and the growing burden of regulatory and ESG disclosure. Analyst houses consistently highlight platform unification, xP&A (extended planning & analysis), and AI-augmented workflows as best practice. Deloitte+2Gartner+2

The strategic why: Three structural forces

1. Agility at enterprise scale
   Volatility has made “quarterly planning” an oxymoron. Finance needs always-on, cross-functional planning tied to operational drivers (sales, supply chain, workforce) rather than periodic reforecasts in silos. Forrester frames this as transforming FP&A into a strategic, always-on capability, not a backward-looking reporting function. Forrester+1
2. Signal quality: one model, one version of truth
   xP&A extends finance planning across functions on a single vendor platform, reducing reconciliation work and latency between plan and reality. Gartner’s definition of cloud xP&A emphasizes platform-centric, data-harmonized architectures, exactly what unified EPM aims to deliver. Gartner
3. Control and compliance without drag
   CFOs continue to prioritize cost discipline, cash flow, and modernization of legacy tooling, while facing talent constraints and change-management headwinds. Unified platforms address both: fewer brittle integrations and standardized governance accelerate transformation with leaner teams. The Hackett Group®+1

What “unified EPM” actually means

A unified EPM platform brings together:

• Planning & xP&A (driver-based, scenario, rolling forecasts)
• Financial close & consolidation (multi-GAAP/IFRS, intercompany, ownership changes)
• Regulatory, management & ESG reporting (narrative + structured)
• Data & AI fabric (shared dimensional model, lineage, predictive/ML assists)

Analysts’ direction of travel is consistent: move from tool sprawl to cohesive, composable platforms that connect finance with the business and enable real-time decisioning. Gartner+1

Evidence from the field: What analysts are signaling

• CFO priorities: Cost optimization, cash conversion, and digital acceleration remain top of the list, with finance leaders citing talent and adoption gaps as real bottlenecks, reinforcing the need for platforms that lower operating friction. The Hackett Group®+1
• xP&A trend: Gartner’s market guidance positions xP&A as the modern planning standard, a cross-functional, platform-based approach. Gartner
• Platform leaders: Independent assessments repeatedly recognize unified EPM suites that span planning, consolidation, and disclosure, CCH® Tagetik among them (Gartner MQ for Financial Planning Software; IDC MarketScape leadership). Yahoo Finance+3Wolters Kluwer+3Wolters Kluwer+3

The business case: Five outcomes CFOs can bank on

1. Cycle-time compression
   Close faster; reforecast in hours not weeks; publish board packs from the same governed model. (Forrester’s “always-on” planning imperative aligns directly with this goal.) Forrester
2. Decision latency ↓, foresight ↑
   Shared drivers across finance and operations eliminate spreadsheet drift; predictive assists surface risk/opportunity early. (Forrester, Deloitte.) Forrester+1
3. Cost to serve finance ↓
   Rationalizing a patchwork of point tools cuts license, integration, and maintenance overhead, key in a cost-containment environment (Hackett). The Hackett Group®
4. Assurance by design
   Regulatory, management, and ESG outputs roll off a single, controlled data foundation, improving auditability and reducing disclosure risk. (IDC MarketScape commentary on finance + sustainability convergence.) Wolters Kluwer
5. Change that sticks
   Unified UX, process templates, and embedded workflows mitigate the biggest CFO transformation challenges: skills, adoption, and overload. (Deloitte CFO Signals.) Deloitte

Architecture patterns that separate leaders from laggards

• One governed model, many views: A shared dimensional model where FP&A, consolidation, and ESG draw from the same hierarchies and metadata. (Aligns with xP&A platform criteria.) Gartner
• Driver-based, scenario-native planning: Tie P&L, balance sheet, and cash to operational drivers; run multi-scenario playbooks on demand (Forrester’s “strategic weapon” framing). Forrester
• Close-plan convergence: Journals, eliminations, and ownership changes reflect back into plans automatically; plans inform close analytics.
• Disclosure-ready from day one: Narrative reporting and regulatory packs sit on the same data foundation (IDC’s emphasis on unified finance + sustainability reporting). Wolters Kluwer
• Composable integrations: Open APIs to ERP, data lakes, and operational systems without brittle custom code.
• AI with guardrails: Explainable driver analysis, anomaly detection, and text generation for commentary, governed by role-based security and lineage. (Forrester 2024 planning guides on AI investment.) Forrester

What to ask vendors (and your team)

1. Model governance: Can finance own dimensions, drivers, and hierarchies without IT tickets? How are changes versioned and audited? (Gartner’s xP&A definition stresses a cohesive, data-harmonized platform.) Gartner
2. Close + plan on one stack: Is consolidation native to the platform, or a bolted-on module from a different code base?
3. Scenario performance: How many simultaneous scenarios at enterprise dimensionality before performance degrades?
4. Disclosure extensibility: Can we produce statutory, management, and ESG narratives from the same truth set? (IDC notes finance + sustainability convergence.) Wolters Kluwer
5. AI transparency: What models, what guardrails, and how are predictions explained? (Forrester urges disciplined AI experimentation.) Forrester
6. Time-to-value playbook: Prebuilt content (cash, capex, workforce), migration accelerators, and change-management aids, critical given CFO talent constraints. Deloitte

A pragmatic roadmap to unify EPM in 180 days

• Weeks 0–4: Baseline & design. Inventory models, dimensions, close tasks, and disclosures; define the enterprise driver tree; select pilot scopes (e.g., Opex + Workforce + Cash).
• Weeks 5–12: Build the spine. Stand up the core model; connect ERP and data sources; implement driver-based planning and a limited consolidation flow; run side-by-side with legacy.
• Weeks 13–20: Expand & converge. Add scenario playbooks; converge close + plan (intercompany, ownership, FX); wire up management reporting from the governed model.
• Weeks 21–26: Industrialize. Automate narrative reporting; roll out ESG/CSRD mappings where relevant; codify governance (RACI, change control) and enablement.

This staged approach aligns with analyst guidance on platform standardization first, breadth second, and targeted AI adoption as readiness grows. Forrester+1

Where CCH Tagetik fits, aligned to best practice (without the hype)

While this isn’t a product pitch, many CFOs shortlist CCH® Tagetik specifically because it packages the architecture patterns above into one platform: planning/xP&A, close & consolidation, regulatory and ESG reporting on a shared, governed model, recognized by Gartner and IDC in recent assessments. If you prioritize unification, governance, and disclosure-readiness, Tagetik’s design aligns with those outcomes. Wolters Kluwer+2Wolters Kluwer+2

Actionable takeaways for finance leaders

• Codify a driver tree that links P&L, balance sheet, cash, and operational metrics. (If the vendor can’t implement it cleanly, it’s not truly unified.)
• Insist on native consolidation in the same platform as planning to eliminate reconciliation tax.
• Adopt xP&A incrementally: start with workforce and revenue ops, then extend to supply chain and capex. Gartner
• Make AI useful, not magical: Begin with driver analysis, scenario generation, and anomaly flags, use governance and explainability from day one. Forrester
• Measure what matters: Track time-to-reforecast, close cycle time, disclosure error rates, and planning participation across functions.

Bottom line CFOs aren’t unifying EPM for elegance. They’re doing it to shorten decision loops, raise the signal-to-noise ratio, and embed assurance, all while keeping transformation costs contained. That’s the real ROI of a unified platform: one model, many decisions, zero drama.