Forecast certification
We start with the argument, not the tool
Producing the forecast is not the manual part. The manual part is the argument just before sign-off — whose number wins, what evidence justifies an override, who approves it, and what happens the next time the same case comes round.
Who this is for
Finance signs the number. It does not control the inputs.
At a certain size the forecast stops coming from one place. Sales has a view in the CRM, finance has adjustments in a model, and leadership wants one number by a date. Finance is accountable for that number even though it controls almost none of the inputs.
That logic — which source wins, what override is allowed, who signs — currently lives in people's heads, side-calculations and Slack threads. It is rarely written down anywhere that survives a team change. We write it down, build it into a process, and put a ceiling on every action that process is allowed to take.
This is you if
- Three or more systems feed the forecast
- The sales forecast is judgment-driven, not stage-weighted arithmetic
- Two functions publish their own version of the same number
- A recurring board or leadership date you cannot move
- FP&A exists as its own function, with at least one dedicated person
If one person can still settle it in a conversation, you do not need this yet. We would rather say so.
What we build
Four parts of one process
Certification and restatement are two halves of the same promise: that finance can defend a number, and knows when it needs correcting.
Adjudication
The disagreement surfaced, your override rule applied, and the exception routed to whoever has authority over it.
- GTM and finance views of the same line, compared
- Your rules, not a generic default
- Approved before sign-off, not corrected after
Certification
One number finance is willing to stand behind, and the record of how it got there.
- The approver, the evidence and the rationale kept together
- Sign-off as a state in a system, not a person saying yes
- Last quarter's decision available as precedent
Restatement
What catches the certified number that quietly stopped being true after you published it.
- Remembers what was reported, and when
- Flags the figure a late correction has invalidated
- Tells you before somebody else notices
The management pack
The monthly report assembled from governed data, with the working shown and follow-ups answered on the same numbers.
- Built from the systems you already run
- Source and methodology cited on every answer
- Board questions answered without another reconciliation
How it happens
Three steps, in this order, every time
- 1
Write down the rules
We sit with finance through a real cycle and get the override logic said out loud — which source wins when, what adjustment is allowed, who signs.
Your own adjudication rules on paper, whether or not you build with us.
- 2
Run it beside the manual process
We build the rules into Insighter against your systems and run a cycle in parallel, until the certified number and the one you produced by hand agree.
A certified number you can compare against the one you already trust.
- 3
Govern it
Every action gets a ceiling: what it may do alone, what needs a person, what it may never do.
A control surface, an audit log, and an off switch that works instantly.
Engagement
Scoped after a cycle
Pricing depends on the systems involved, how many exceptions a cycle throws up, and how much of the judgment should stay human. We start by sitting through one real close, then propose a fixed scope — not an open-ended hourly menu. The findings are yours either way.
- We will not certify a number whose rule you cannot state
- We will not let an agent act without a ceiling
- We will not train on your data
- We will not sell you a process you are too small to need
Start with one forecast cycle.
We sit through a real close, watch where the numbers disagree, and come back with your override rules written down and what it would take to run them.
