Skip to content

Group Budget vs Actual reporting suite

Finance reporting automation Internal work sample

A shared set of monthly reports comparing budgets with actual results, built for finance teams working across multiple companies.

  1. The problem

    Fragmented entity files made monthly reporting slow, inconsistent and difficult to review.

  2. My role

    Built a reusable Excel and Power Query template that selects the right company and period, replacing separate reporting files.

  3. Where it stands

    Management receives reports sooner, with less preparation work and more finance time available for analysis.

Results and evidence

−85%
Prep time per entity
−60%
Reporting production effort
40 → 16 hours per cycle
35 → 6 days
Delivery lead time
~1,400 hrs/yr
Capacity released

Source notes

Released roughly 1,400 hours of annual finance capacity.

Built reports comparing budgets with actual results, cutting preparation time per entity by 85%.

Cut management reporting production effort by 60%.

Used reusable reporting templates to cut preparation from 40 hours to 16 and delivery lead time from 35 days to 6.

Delivery lead time, days Δ -83%
35 Before — fragmented per-entity work files

bespoke file per entity

6 After — parameter-driven Power Query templates

one maintained codepath serves all entities

Both values as documented in the CV; measured on the live monthly reporting cycle, 2026.

Business impact

Released roughly 1,400 hours a year of finance capacity (EUR 50k–60k value) while improving speed, consistency and reviewability.

How I did it

  1. 01

    Standardised inputs so one controlled process serves multiple entities and input methods.

  2. 02

    Used entity and period parameters to direct one maintained query path to the relevant source.

Tools and working context

Recurring group reporting across a multinational, multi-entity environment with heterogeneous inputs.

Tools
Excel · Power Query
Business area
Management reporting · Budgeting
Skill type
Automation · Data & Reporting

Why I made these choices

  • Used parameters instead of bespoke entity files to keep the suite maintainable at scale.
  • Kept the solution in finance's existing Excel and Power Query environment, with reviewable logic and no additional licence requirement.

Skills used

  • Power Query (M) Data & Reporting Strong
  • Excel (advanced) ERP & Systems Strong
  • Management reporting & budgeting Finance Strong

Full skill evidence →

What I learned

  • Standardising inputs created the scale benefit; the automation then applied one process across entities.

What comes next

  • Connect refresh to the group data model and validate inputs before processing.

← All case studies · Discuss this work →