Sample outputs

Inspect the finding. Understand the decision.

Three synthetic demonstrations show how a diagnostic connects financial behaviour and system dependencies to an accountable next action.

Synthetic demonstrations

All identifiers, amounts, systems and scenarios below are invented for explanation. These are not client results, validated production rules or accounting advice.

01 · Posting lineage

A balanced entry can still use the wrong account.

Decision: what evidence is needed before accepting the migrated posting rule?

For this demonstration only, the stipulated requirement for synthetic event SYN-EVT-001 is a ZAR 1,000 debit to Settlement Clearing and a ZAR 1,000 credit to Settlement Payable. The observed result uses a different debit account.

Synthetic posting comparison — event SYN-EVT-001
Leg	Expected under the example rule	Observed in the example	Finding
Debit	Settlement Clearing · ZAR 1,000	Operating Expense · ZAR 1,000	Account attribution differs
Credit	Settlement Payable · ZAR 1,000	Settlement Payable · ZAR 1,000	Matches the stipulated credit
Balance check	Debits equal credits	Debits equal credits	Balance alone does not resolve the difference

Gap: The reason for the changed debit account has not been established. The arithmetic cannot distinguish a mapping error from an authorised design change.

Next evidence: The approved accounting requirement, effective-dated mapping, source posting instruction, observed ledger extract and accountable finance review.

Decision condition: Resolve and document the difference before accepting this rule for the defined test population.

Explore the LedgerGuard diagnostic

02 · Legacy dependency

The posting feed is replaced. A downstream allocation still depends on it.

Decision: can the proposed legacy batch component retire with its current scope?

In this invented scenario, the target design replaces a ledger feed. An operations allocation workbook also consumes a reference-enrichment file from the same legacy batch component.

Synthetic retirement dependency register
Dependency	Available example evidence	Status in the scenario	Required action
Ledger feed	Target interface design	Replacement is documented	Confirm the target feed through agreed tests
Reference-enrichment file	Workbook input mapping	Consumer exists; target replacement is absent	Assign a destination and accountable owner
Operational allocation	Process walkthrough	Continuity has not been demonstrated	Test end-to-end allocation with the proposed replacement

Gap: The application retirement scope does not yet cover the allocation dependency.

Next evidence: Consumer inventory, interface specifications, file usage history, process-owner review and a controlled continuity test.

Decision condition: Address the dependency through replacement, coexistence or an explicitly approved process change before retiring the component.

Explore dependency assessment

03 · Finance-platform options

Establish the requirements before ranking products.

Decision: which planning and consolidation options warrant a detailed fit assessment?

A synthetic group needs driver-based planning, statutory consolidation, controlled journals and support across subsidiaries. The shortlist below describes architecture options, not verified product capabilities.

Illustrative finance-platform comparison — no scores or product verdicts
Requirement	Extend the current landscape	Introduce a planning platform	Redesign planning and consolidation	Evidence required
Planning requirements	To assess	To assess	To assess	Process, model and user requirements
Statutory consolidation	To assess	To assess	To assess	Scope, entity structures and current product evidence
Data and control continuity	To assess	To assess	To assess	Source lineage, reconciliation and control needs
Delivery and operating fit	To assess	To assess	To assess	Skills, support, transition and commercial inputs

Gap: Product fit, option costs and transition viability remain unvalidated.

Next evidence: Approved requirements, current vendor documentation, architecture proposals, commercial inputs and targeted proof-of-fit results.

Decision condition: Agree criteria and weighting with the decision owner before scoring. Record disqualifying conditions and sensitivity to assumptions.

Explore finance-platform assessment

Your next decision

Discuss your finance or migration problem.

Start with the decision you need to make. Scope, evidence requirements, responsibilities and fees are agreed after an introductory conversation.

Discuss your problem View sample outputs