1. 1 Validating Revenue, the Customer List, and Customer Location

2. 2 Problem:  Assurance was needed that Revenue, the Customer List, and Customer Location where accurate

3. 3 Impact :  If revenue, or the customer list, or the customer location where not accurate then revenue would not be properly reported.

4. 4 Impact Cont.  If the customer list or customer location were not accurate then customer satisfaction and future sales would suffer.

5. 5 Impact Cont.  If the customer location were not accurate then sales/use and gross receipts taxes paid to the customer’s local jurisdiction would not be correct. This would subject the service/product providing company to tax penalties and interest charges.

6. 6 Opportunity:  Provide and independent process to assure accuracy.

7. 7 Event :  A stakeholder manager from a business unit wanted assurance his revenue numbers were correct (which impact results, revenue sharing and compensation).

8. 8 What did it take?  He was willing to spend the money (outside of his organization) needed to develop the assurance process.

9. 9 What did it take? Cont.  He was willing to have the normal business process people (in his organization) spend the time needed to interface with the assurance process developers.

10. 10 What did it take? Cont.  He became aware that there was one place in the company that shared his interest in having an independent (independent of the normal business process) continuous (monthly) assurance process. That one place had access to all company information and was audited constantly by various tax jurisdictions.

11. 11 The assurance process design:  Enhance process in which the monthly biller feeds were validated each month to ensure that sales/use and gross receipts taxes were being properly paid by:

12. 12 by:  Accessing the upstream (from the Tax processes) customer lists and their associated customer location data,

13. 13 by: Cont.  Reconciling to exceptions data and timing differences between database updates,

14. 14 by: Cont.  Comparing to Unit/Management Group totals.

15. 15 During the assurance process development :  Areas needing improvement in the normal upstream processes were identified.  People supporting the upstream processes became more aware and more assured of how their processes worked and were working.

16. 16 The outcome:  Even though the upstream numbers and the assurance numbers match every month, the assurance process has continued to be funded. Cutting the assurance process out of a tight budget is not considered cost effective. It is considered muscle and bone – not a fat luxury.