Layered enterprise landscape
Shows where capabilities, platforms and control responsibilities sit. The example layers are generic.
Decision question: Where does each obligation live, and which dependencies cross the layer boundaries?
Sample advisory artefacts
These generic demonstrations show the form and purpose of common advisory outputs. They contain no client data and do not represent a specific implementation.
Labels and example fields are generic. A real engagement would populate them only from reviewed documents, stakeholder validation and agreed evidence.
Shows where capabilities, platforms and control responsibilities sit. The example layers are generic.
Decision question: Where does each obligation live, and which dependencies cross the layer boundaries?
Connects a business event to its accounting result and reconciliation evidence.
Evidence required: event definition, accounting rule, interface record, posting reference, exception route and reconciliation result.
A blank decision frame. No scores are pre-filled because weighting must come from the organisation's requirements.
| Decision criterion | Option A | Option B | Option C | Evidence required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business and finance fit | Assess | Assess | Assess | Approved requirements |
| Accounting and control | Assess | Assess | Assess | Rules and control evidence |
| Integration and data | Assess | Assess | Assess | Interfaces and data profile |
| Operability and support | Assess | Assess | Assess | Operating model |
| Transition risk | Assess | Assess | Assess | Dependencies and constraints |
| Cost and value | Assess | Assess | Assess | Validated commercial inputs |
Decision discipline: criteria, weighting, evidence quality, assumptions and the accountable decision owner are recorded before scoring.
Links material risk and control questions to evidence, accountability and a decision.
| Risk or obligation | Control question | Evidence | Owner or decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Completeness | Are all in-scope events captured? | Population and reconciliation record | Assign and validate |
| Accuracy | Is the correct rule applied? | Rule catalogue and test evidence | Assign and validate |
| Traceability | Can the outcome be reconstructed? | Identifiers, lineage and logs | Assign and validate |
| Exception handling | Are breaks owned and resolved? | Queue, ageing and resolution evidence | Assign and validate |
Governance principle: an assertion is not treated as evidence until its source, owner, date and review status are recorded.
Uses the firm's four-stage approach to move from an unresolved question to governed next actions.
Decision, scope, owners, constraints and success evidence.
Current state, flows, controls, gaps and evidence quality.
Options, target state, transition states and trade-offs.
Recommendation, assumptions, decision gates and next actions.
Roadmap rule: dates, cost and benefits are added only after dependencies, delivery capacity and commercial inputs have been validated.
A concise structure for a decision that remains traceable after the meeting.
The exact approval, choice or direction needed.
Confirmed facts, source quality and known gaps.
Viable alternatives against agreed criteria.
Preferred action and the reason it fits.
Assumptions, controls, dependencies and triggers.
Owner, date, rationale and required follow-through.
Outcome: a decision can be reviewed later without relying on memory or presentation narrative.
Apply the structure
Actual artefacts are shaped to the agreed scope and populated only from available, reviewable evidence.