The controller and his team are completely and constantly absorbed with the preparation of data, results analyses and reports; they lack the time (and energy) to provide navigation services to the decision-makers.
The existing controlling reports and tools are not meaningful and/or regularly contain significant errors.
The reporting logic is not consistent; inconsistent and/or not very meaningful notation (form of presentation) of the reported data.
The existing planning material is incoherent or not correctly interlinked between the individual functions.
Lack of commitment to consistently achieving the applicable result targets, lack of explanation, justification and apology culture in the event of deviations from the plan.
Controllers and managers do not meet "at eye level" - there is a (psychological and/or hierarchical) gap between the functions.
The calculations (product, project) deviate to a considerable or unknown extent from the presentation of the same object in financial and operational accounting.
Project results are regularly significantly worse than indicated in the preliminary calculation.
Managers have (unacknowledged) weaknesses in understanding financial contexts and are rarely given explanations.
Company plans are drawn up individually for each specialist function and then summarized separately by the controller, resulting in inadequate or no coordination of plans between the functional decision-makers.
Navigation methods and results are hierarchically overridden ("This position can't be right!").
Controllers understand too little about the business to credibly fulfill their role as navigators.
Inconsistent interpretation of accounting and reporting rules by the various business units, lack of comparability, inconsistent group values.
There is a need for specialist training and/or personal support/supervision of key personnel, but there is a lack of know-how and/or capacity.
What principles do we follow?
Partnership-based, responsible and trustworthy advice at eye level
Consistently goal- and impact-oriented approach
Clear definition of targets before the start of the mandate, measurable mandate objectives
Targeted situation analyses and fact-based assessment by specialists and managers with broad and in-depth experience
Prioritized use of resources in the subject areas with the best cost/benefit ratio
Modular structure of the mandate definition, correspondingly simple and quick adjustment of the scope of the assignment
Consultants are personally available to the client to the full extent agreed, no delegation of agreed services to "juniors"