Corporate management: Is a world of parallel truths developing?

We are in the midst of a rapid development: More and more data, more and more new tools, ever better performance, including AI, meet a wide range of requirements. At the same time, the environment is changing: in addition to regulatory requirements, for example in ESG reporting or in accordance with IFRS, new framework conditions are emerging at a high frequency, for example through adjustments to customs duties and transfer prices.

This gives rise to key questions for corporate management:

• How do we avoid getting lost in discussions about AI where sound solutions already exist – and who identifies them?
• Who ensures that data is found, cleansed and validly interpreted – and on what basis are decisions made?
• How is it possible to maintain consistent control with a growing variety of data, tools and requirements – and where does the responsibility lie: in finance or in IT?
• Access to information is a given – but can it still be reliably classified in a highly dynamic environment?
• Will the increasing complexity of corporate management become a permanent challenge – or will technological possibilities lead to real relief in the long term?

What is your opinion on this, what are your experiences? We look forward to discussing this with you!

Guido Kleinhietpaß is the ICV Board Member as well as a trainer and consultant at the CA controller akademie. He has supported companies for many years in the further development of finance and controlling – particularly at the interface between management, organization and change.

“An exciting impulse.

In my view, the decisive task of controlling in the future will be to translate between technologies and management. Not every analytical possibility is automatically relevant to management – and this is precisely where clear positioning is needed.

We need to decide more strongly which insights really add value to corporate management and which complexity we deliberately do not bring to management. This is the only way for controlling to remain a reliable point of reference in an increasingly data-driven environment.”

Elisabeth Herrle, Director Group Industrial Finance, Vaillant Group

“Thank you, Elisabeth, not every analytical option is relevant to management and not every data source is equally reliable – and the data sources are increasing:
– IoT, platform data, external data, ESG data
– self-service BI → everyone builds their own “truth”
– data lakes instead of structured ERP logic

There doesn’t seem to be a single source of truth everywhere. I don’t want to go back to the old model (figures are only available after the month-end closing). But in terms of clear data – despite all the inconsistencies and weaknesses in the master data – we were further ahead than we are today. It used to be:
“The figure comes from the ERP = is correct”
Today: the figure depends on the AI model, the type of filter or the data status. Numbers become interpretable instead of derivable.

I find it increasingly challenging to provide the orientation (recognized + accepted) that you are talking about.”

Guido Kleinhietpaß, ICV Board Member, Partner Consultant and Trainer at CA Akademie AG

“I can only agree. And checking data, methods and systems will become even more important for reliable corporate management in the future!”

Annegret Glöckner, Executive Advisor, Lecturer, Former Big 4 Partner, Auditor

“Thank you, Annegret Glöckner, reliability is a key word for me. Because I have the impression that the ‘single source of truth’ is in danger:
– specialist departments build their own analytics
– data scientists vs. controllers
– …
In a world of ‘parallel truths’, it will be difficult, but probably necessary, for an authority to (continue to) exist that creates transparency, connects logics and provides orientation.”

Guido Kleinhietpaß, ICV Board Member, Partner Consultant and Trainer at CA Akademie AG

“A very apt thesis.

In my view, the increasing complexity arises less from the amount of data alone, but rather from the multitude of possible interpretations.

The central question will be: Who will be able to turn data into a consistent basis for decision-making – and thus provide guidance?

This is precisely where one of the most important roles of controlling will lie in the future.”

Claudia Maron, Head of AI Competence Center in Finance & Controlling, DATEV eG

“Claudia Maron, that’s right. And it’s no longer “the one” amount of data. Instead, there are many different sets of data that lead to different truths. Perhaps the following already applies in some companies today:
ERP ≠ leading system

What doesn’t exist in parallel:
– BI tools
– planning tools
– data science models
– Excel lives on (!)
– etc.

We seem to have several “leading systems” at the same time – but no one perceives this as a ‘contradiction in terms’. As a result, I observe different data statuses and logics among my consulting customers:
–> BI says A
–> ERP says B
–> Data Science says C

For me, this is the perceived battle for interpretative sovereignty.”

Guido Kleinhietpaß, ICV Board Member, Partner Consultant and Trainer at CA Akademie AG

“…but fortunately we have AI, because – when used correctly – it is known to reduce complexity.”

Thomas Rautenstrauch, Professor of Accounting and Corporate Finance | Director of Master Program in Financial Management, OST – Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences

“Yes, and I also emphasize the “used correctly”, ThomasRautenstrauch. Because not all problems are predestined for the use of AI. But everyone is crying out for AI – whether it suits them or not. Occasionally, I get the impression that some people equate C-level AI with an all-time superior solution – sometimes it seems that the sovereignty of interpretation has already been (prematurely) decided.”

Guido Kleinhietpaß, ICV Board Member, Partner Consultant and Trainer at CA Akademie AG

“‘In the next five years’ is quite astonishing.
The underlying problems – competing logics, figures that cannot be derived cleanly – have been known in controlling for decades.
If this is still being formulated as a future topic today, it says more about the state of the discussion than about the technology.”

Holger Breuer, Founder Breuer Management Consultants

“Yes, Holger Breuer, a valid point – competing logics and figures that cannot be clearly derived have accompanied controlling for decades. This is precisely why it is exciting to see ‘how’ this familiar problem is changing: It does not remain stable, but is exacerbated by the increasing diversity of data sources, methods and systems. We are discussing it again here as a topic for the future because a structural problem that has never been fully solved is currently gaining momentum due to new framework conditions. Technology not only makes an old problem visible, but also massively increases the pressure.

It used to be a latent conflict of objectives within an (ERP) system. Today, it is an open competition between IT systems, data rooms and methods.

For me, this is where the real tension lies: the basic problem is not new – but its manifestation is. I am not asking ‘whether’ corporate management will become more complex, but ‘who’ will have the authority to interpret figures, models and decisions in the future. I fear that we are developing into a world of parallel truths that undermine the ‘single source of truth’.”

Guido Kleinhietpaß, ICV Board Member, Partner Consultant and Trainer at CA Akademie AG