Findings
Where the group close loses time and where the control risk actually sits.
Multi-entity consolidation
Highest-signal pattern
Analyzed by Close Flight Check rules v1
Consolidating four entities in a spreadsheet is a control problem, not just a slow one.
Multi-entity groups without a consolidation ERP almost always end up with one workbook, one owner and one point of failure. The Close Flight Check flags this pattern explicitly — it is one of the strongest signals in the scoring model — and the assessment turns it into a defined, reviewable routine.
Finance-automation practice by BetterWrk · No logins or ledger data in the Flight Check
Is this worth a teardown
This is usually worth a teardown when…
…versus when your group structure is genuinely well-served by what you already run.
Worth a teardown
- Three or more legal entities and no consolidation ERP
- Eliminations are rebuilt by hand from exports each period
- The consolidation workbook has one author and no reviewer
- Intercompany balances are chased by email near cutoff
- A new entity or acquisition means rebuilding the model
- FX translation is applied manually and inconsistently
Probably fine as-is
- You run NetSuite, Sage Intacct or similar with consolidation configured
- Eliminations post through a defined, repeatable routine
- Intercompany balances agree automatically before cutoff
- More than one person can run and review the consolidation
- Adding an entity is a configuration change, not a rebuild
Why this scores badly
What the Flight Check looks at in a group structure
Entity count on its own says little. The combination of entity count, consolidation tooling and who can actually run the process is what moves the score.
- Number of legal entities and how they roll up
- Whether a consolidation-capable ERP is in the stack at all
- How eliminations are produced — configured routine or rebuilt workbook
- Whether intercompany balances agree before or after cutoff
- FX translation method and where the rates come from
- How many people can run the consolidation end to end
- Whether the workbook is version-controlled or emailed around
- What review happens between producing and posting
- How a new entity or acquisition gets absorbed
- Whether the group audit has raised this before
Every consolidation step gets a classification
What gets automated, what changes, what stays manual
These are common patterns after review. They illustrate how classification usually works — never a universal promise. Your assessment determines the actual approach for each step.
Automate
Assist
Redesign
Retire
Resolve
Swipe to see more →
| Consolidation step | Automation approach | Classification | Typical condition | Verified by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trial-balance collection per entity | Scheduled pull into one structured store | Automate | Each entity's ledger is reachable | Balance tie-out per entity |
| Intercompany balance agreement | Automated matching + exception queue | Automate | Counterparty coding is consistent | Net-to-zero check before posting |
| Elimination entry generation | Structured, version-controlled routine | Redesign | Elimination rules formalised per pair | Balanced eliminations, reviewer sign-off |
| FX translation | Rate source wired in, method fixed | Automate | Rate source and method agreed | Recalculation against prior period |
| Consolidated pack assembly | Templated assembly from the store | Assist | Definitions and layout agreed | Figures traced to source |
| The legacy master workbook | — | Retire | Superseded and reconciled in parallel first | Owner sign-off to decommission |
| Entity on an unsupported local ledger | Reviewed before any promise | Resolve | Integration path unverified until reviewed | Integration parity check first |
One price, credited to your build
The $1,500 Finance Operations Assessment
Board-ready findings on your group close, a cited AI finance skill, one deployed automation targeting your biggest consolidation bottleneck, and verified time saved. The fee is credited in full to your automation build.
One automation
Usually intercompany matching or trial-balance collection — deployed and managed.
Verified time saved
Measured against your baseline group close — not a projection.
Illustrative launch pricing pending commercial validation.
A green run is not the finish line
What "done" means for a consolidation automation
Consolidation touches statutory reporting, so acceptance is stricter than for a routine close task. At minimum it covers:
- Consolidated output matches the manual workbook for representative periods
- Eliminations balance, and residuals are explained rather than plugged
- FX translation reproduces prior-period figures under the same rates
- A new or removed entity is handled without a rebuild
- Every generated entry carries an audit trail
- A second person can run and review the process
- Explicit group-controller sign-off before reliance
Illustrative acceptance case
PASS
Automated eliminations reproduce the manual consolidation for the period
Manual workbookAutomated runReconciled
- Consolidated totals
- Match
- Elimination balance
- Net zero
- FX translation
- Match
- Audit trail
- Recorded
- Second-operator run
- Pass
- Controller sign-off
- Pass
Illustrative evidence record — not a customer result.
Questions about group close
What finance leaders ask about consolidation
Are you going to tell us to buy NetSuite?
Not by default. A consolidation ERP is sometimes the right answer, but it is a large, slow purchase and plenty of groups get most of the benefit by formalising eliminations and automating intercompany matching around the ledgers they already run. We are not a reseller for any accounting platform, so we have no incentive to push you toward one.
We're mid-acquisition. Is it too early?
Usually it's the opposite — an acquisition is when consolidation pain becomes visible and when there's budget and attention to fix it. The Flight Check is free and takes minutes, so it costs little to find out where you stand before the new entity lands.
Will this satisfy our auditors?
We design for auditability — version-controlled logic, an audit trail on every generated entry, and a documented reviewer step — but we can't speak for your auditor. What we can do is make the process explainable, which is usually the thing a spreadsheet-based consolidation fails at.
Our entities are on different accounting systems. Does that break this?
It makes trial-balance collection the first problem to solve rather than the last. Mixed estates are common. Where a local ledger has no clean integration path we mark it "Resolve" and verify it before promising anything, rather than assuming it works.
Next step
Talk to a finance-ops specialist
Prefer to talk it through first? Tell us about your group structure and a specialist will follow up — or book 20 minutes directly.
Start with evidence
Find out what your group close is really costing.
Run the free Close Flight Check, then decide whether the assessment is worth it.