Designing the finance function as if it were 2030
An operating model, role design and cost case for a finance team where automation and AI are part of the org chart, not a side project.
Context
Most finance teams treat automation as something a keen individual does on the side. The work I do only compounds if the *function* is built for it — the right roles, the right capabilities, and a clear view of what to keep in-house versus contract. So I stepped back from individual tools and designed the team itself.
Challenge
Define what a modern, AI-augmented finance function actually looks like — the roles, the capabilities each one needs, the sequence to hire them in, and an honest cost case — for a finance leader (or a CEO) to decide against, not a slide that hand-waves "we'll use AI."
What I built
An operating-model and capability design organised around the real pillars of the function — controllership, FP&A and analytics, digital finance and automation, and commercial finance — with:
- Role definitions that pair traditional finance depth with the new capabilities (an automation lead, an analytics-and-data role, a treasury role, a commercial business-partner role), each with the skills and seniority spelled out.
- A hiring sequence — what to build first, what can wait, and where a fixed-term contract beats a permanent hire during a pilot phase.
- A cost case — a defensible, fully-loaded view of what the function costs to run, so the investment conversation is grounded in numbers, not enthusiasm.
It treats automation and AI as part of the structure — roles and capabilities on the org chart — rather than a hobby bolted onto people already at capacity.
Outcome
A concrete, costed blueprint for a finance team that's built to use automation and AI by design — the kind of operating-model thinking a finance leader is expected to bring, made specific enough to act on.