In a recent advertising article in
The Ideal CFO Skills
Answers
It depends on the company's stage in its life cycle and also depends on size of the company. Different stages require different distribution of skills. Size means ability to delegate thus spending less time (but still responsible).
1
Emerson, pick a company you have been associated with, and give a relationship value.. ie, 200M, 15 acct/fin FTE, 30%Strategist, etc...
In firms $50 - 300 million CFO/Finance Executive role was 30% strategist, 40% catalyst, 20% steward and 10% administrator. Firms required operational optimization and
Effective Strategies (30%), effective Systems (25%), effective Culture (25%),
While I agree with the original article's point, there's no 'right answer' in practice beyond the very broad parameters suggested in the original article.
I doubt the answers you are receiving even align with what actually occurs because none of us sit here with timesheets.
It's human nature to get these way off. I worked on a McKinsey cost-reduction project at First Interstate Bank very early in my
2
Jeff -
Don't keep us in suspense... the gulf was (in large painted strokes)...???
I'm currently spending ($20M company) 10% Steward, 50% Strategist, 20% Catalyst and 20% Administrator.
I expect this to change to 15% Steward, 35% Strategist, 15% Administrator and 35% Catalyst.
I agree with what Emerson stated earlier, it depends on where you are in the company's life cycle. As a CFO in a small non profit ($5M annual revenue), I find myself moving from one one skillset to another quite frequently. Being a good steward of funds is number 1, while being a strategist and catalyst for change play important roles as well. We should not forget the
I will add the following factors : (aside from what I listed above)
(1) depends on the performance of the previous CFO << this is a major factor
(2) direction the CEO wants to take
Mine would be very similar to Mark's: Effective Strategies (30%), effective Systems (25%), effective Culture (25%), leadership/mentorship (20%). For me it is fairly balanced around these areas. Interesting question; made me think. Love the challenges.
I would like to see:
40% Strategist, 40% Catalyst, 15% Steward and 5% Administrator
Working closely with the CEO will make all this more effective.
Wayne, do you sit there with a time sheet and measure your hours? Assuming a 50-hour work week, a 5% change in Steward takes you from 5 hours to 7.5 hours.
1
Actually, yes. For this client.
In general, I agree w/Emerson about 'It depends.' However, I disagree with the example given in the set-up piece about what a strategist does: "analyzing data to guide decision making." That's what a
Among other tasks, a strategist looks for--or, better, anticipates--changes in the external environment at two levels: the remote level (a.k.a. 'macroenvironment') and the industry (or strategic-group) level. There are six forces at each of those levels. The analysis is mostly qualitative and involves context. Few CFOs of my acquaintance understand the implications of industry structure. Fewer still even understand what the word 'strategy' means.
A strategist also keeps tabs on competitors--changes in personnel, new hires, new offices, new services and products, etc. This requires significant research, analytical, and integrative skills. As with the analyses in the preceding paragraph, the one here is almost wholly qualitative.
At least as important as keeping an eye on current competitors is scanning for potential new entrants into the domain. This is a distinctly non-trivial and complex task that doesn't lend itself to step-type 1-2-3 approaches. It requires a deep understanding of the evolution of the domain, its barriers to entry, would-be disruptive innovation(s), and, esp. these days, potential complementarities.
Most important, in my view, is this: the strategist in a company that is NOT the market leader in its competitive domain, whether industry or strategic group, must understand that the ONLY viable strategy for the company or the division is 'differentiation.' For any competitor other than the company with the biggest market share in the domain, competing on price is a race to the bottom of the ocean. . .and the divers are wearing cement wet-suits. And, of course, committing to a strategy of differentiation is a ton easier than actually designing and implementing such a strategy. It has many moving parts because part of the definition of 'strategy' is that it is a 'unique system of complementary activities.'
The other factor to consider in addition to current state/need of the company is the CEO and management team peers - there is what a CFO can do (your skills) and what you are asked to do (your tasks).
Having worked for a wide range of management teams, I find that I plugged in where they needed help - for example, I worked for a President and team that were all very strong in Sales and
There has been a series of questions posted on Proformative related to working with CEO's that can provide great insight.
Cheers,
Mark
As related above, it depends on a number of factors including where the company is currently and where it is headed, what is the role of the CFO relative to his peers and his staff, what are the key initiatives, etc. As a general statement, I would not be surprised if the split was an even 25/25/25/25.
Filed Under:
Human Capital