Subscribe / Unsubscribe Enewsletters | Login | Register

Pencil Banner

How to get beyond Finance vs. IT

Bart Perkins | Jan. 19, 2017
IT leaders need to understand the financial policies that control the way IT buys infrastructure and systems.

One thing that you’re likely to encounter in any IT department is resentment toward the Finance department. A staffer might be angry because “those bean counters in Finance who know nothing about technology” directed him to buy one product when he wanted to buy a different one. Or maybe Finance approves the acquisition of an application, but it says to get the server version, not the cloud version (or vice versa; Finance’s decisions can seem maddeningly unpredictable). Or it outright rejects a request to replace a system that users consider to be a boat anchor. “Why?” asks IT. Because, says Finance, that boat anchor can’t be replaced until it’s fully depreciated — never mind that that will be several years in the future.

Without a grounding in your organization’s capital structure and financial practices, such decisions can make Finance appear arbitrary — a description that would amaze most people in Finance, who think of themselves as methodical, pretty much the opposite of arbitrary. In most cases, Finance has practical reasons for its decisions, but to IT leaders, they can seem to defy logic because they are completely unrelated to IT concerns.

If you want to be an effective IT leader, one whose funding requests are usually approved by Finance, you need to take the time to understand your enterprise’s accounting practices. Here are some of the things that tend to drive Finance’s decisions but can seem rather opaque to IT leaders who don’t bother to study their company’s accounting practices:

  • An aversion to balance sheet write-offs. Most Finance departments will capitalize major systems or other investments so that the cost is spread over several years. Finance wants to please the stock market, which likes predictable earnings, so minimizing charges to earnings in any one year is, for them, a no-brainer.

Once an asset is on the balance sheet, accountants and management really dislike writing it off early because write-offs are viewed as failures by the stock market. That’s why Finance may make it difficult to shut down a failing program or to replace a system that is not yet fully depreciated. Letting depreciations run their full course is such an engrained part of the Finance mindset that it takes a very strong political coalition and a highly compelling business case to shake it.

  • A commitment to strengthen the balance sheet. For Finance people, a weak balance sheet means they are failing the company. Startups and other companies with weak balance sheets have difficulty borrowing money, and paying bills as they come due can be a struggle. Any company in that situation wants to conserve cash as much as possible. That puts most capital expenditures out of the question — Finance will almost always want to rent, even when the total cost of ownership favors buying. That might be why your Finance Department prefers cloud, with its low initial cost, over the higher upfront cost of a server and software.
  • The company is EBITDA-driven. Private equity firms often use EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) as a way to justify the sale price of a very fast-growing company. Devised in the mid 1980s by leveraged buyout firms, EBITDA was used to measure a company’s ability to service its debt after financial restructuring. Today, a number of startups and other companies with unconventional balance sheets use it, even though it is not consistent with Generally Acceptable Accounting Principles or International Financial Reporting Standards. An EBITDA-driven company is one whose Finance department will be more likely to tell IT to get the server-based version of an application rather than the cloud version.

 

1  2  Next Page 

Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.