1 / 24

Performance Management at Denton Wilde Sapte

Performance Management at Denton Wilde Sapte. Suzanne Wingate Assistant Director of Finance Tuesday October 16 th 2007. Introduction. Assistant Director of Finance Business and performance analysis Planning, budgeting and forecasting Pricing and profitability 4 years with DWS

bernad
Download Presentation

Performance Management at Denton Wilde Sapte

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Performance Management at Denton Wilde Sapte Suzanne Wingate Assistant Director of Finance Tuesday October 16th 2007

  2. Introduction • Assistant Director of Finance • Business and performance analysis • Planning, budgeting and forecasting • Pricing and profitability • 4 years with DWS • Omnicom, Reuters and PWC

  3. Agenda • Who are Denton Wilde Sapte? • Why did we want it? • How did we chose? • How long did it take? • What are the benefits? • What did we learn? • Next steps

  4. Who are Denton Wilde Sapte? • Major international law firm operating through an limited liability partnership • Headquartered in the City of London • Total revenue for 2006/07 £156m • Principal focus on major clients in four key sectors • Financial Institutions • Energy, Transport & Infrastructure • Real Estate & Retail • Technology, Media & Telecoms

  5. Number of partners and staff

  6. Our footprint

  7. Why did we want business intelligence? • 2003 business strategy review • Formation of client service teams • Needed different views of the business • Replace and consolidate ad-hoc reporting • Flexible reporting • Analytical Capability • To understand key profitability drivers • Deliver headline information via Portal

  8. Why did we want BI?: Business Strategy • Client-centric not fee-earner centric • Client profitability to compliment existing department profitability reporting • Focus on clients and sectors • Measure success of strategy • Revenue trends by sector & by key client • Profitability by sector & by key client • Spread of key client revenue by department & office (cross-selling services)

  9. Why did we want BI? : Flexible reporting • Increasing demand for ad-hoc queries • Resource constraints • Minimise need for programming skills to deliver data • Deliver data directly to business users • Business development, fee earners, accounts, HR etc

  10. Why did we want BI? : Replace existing systems /reports • Pressing need to replace in-house systems including “MIPS” and partner performance reports • Hard to edit or amend (old systems) • Needed to include new KPIs etc. • Pivot-table based sector reporting unwieldy • Proliferation of customised reports • 60 custom Elite reports (4GL) – very hard to maintain • 60 Crystal reports • Numerous SQL query based Excel reports • One data warehouse – one data source for all

  11. Why did we want BI? : Increased analytical capability • To give business users direct access to data • To allow business users to interrogate data themselves • Eliminate need to revert to programmers to drill down to detail • Reduce reliance on Excel alone • Data integrity issues • Exception reporting – top “n” clients, matters… • Faster and better informed decisions

  12. Why did we want BI? : Deliver financial info via Portal • Automate delivery of financial data • Data always available • Reduce timeframes • Reduce reliance on paper • “Lost” reports • Duplication and delivery costs

  13. How did we do it? : Selection process • FD saw demo of BI software • Accounting Systems researched market • Initially considered many vendors • Different views on solution • Cost and IT’s view pointed to MS solution • Decision “sold” to informal steering group • Front end selection • Simple process: look and feel, subjective • Demo with our data; needed prototype warehouse first

  14. How did we do it? : Implementation Engaged consultants (Thorogood) Technical know-how and knowledge transfer Structure and independence Project steering group formalised Representation from IT, Accounts, BD, Thorogood Data validation and cleansing Data capture Client rationalisation Sector and work type coding

  15. How did we do it? : Timescales • Implementation • Data warehouse design, build & testing – 6 months • 6 months (from decision to go live) • Front end implementation very quick • Data cleansing and validation - 5 months • Data capture – 5 months and ongoing • Phase one – client profitability reporting • Further phases since initial pilot

  16. How did we do it? : Technology • SQL Server • Live cube built overnight • Month end cubes saved • ProClarity • 50 users worldwide • Reporting Services • 700 users worldwide • 50 creators • 650 consumers

  17. How have we benefited? (1) • Can quickly measure profitability by • client, • work type, • sector, • matter partner, fee earner etc • Fast and flexible reporting • All but two Crystal and 4GL reports replaced by RS reports or rendered obsolete through introduction of ProClarity • Time frames for report delivery reduced dramatically • Reports now distributed by subscription on working day 1 or 2 • Previously some reports took as long as 2 weeks to prepare, review, collate, duplicate and distribute hard copy

  18. How have we benefited? (2) • Analysis capability in hands of business user • Reliance on programming skills reduced significantly • Time to analyse rather than simply produce data • Data integrity • Confidence in data and data analysis • Facilitates fact based decision making • e.g. Capturing total costs of servicing client from secondments to training to BD activity • Exception reporting • E.g. Missing time reports

  19. Lessons learned (1) • Agree common goal up front • Started simple (not Big Bang) • Have clear objectives and watch for scope • Consultants • Focus, diplomacy and technical know-how • Don’t under-estimate time needed for data cleansing and structuring • The most difficult and time consuming task

  20. Lessons learned (2) • Data capture/recording • Not a one off issue - ongoing • Wider rollout / adoption • Align more with traditional working methods..... • Overly powerful? • Danger with context, use • Security complexities • BI strategy evolves as business needs change

  21. Next steps • Include P&L data from GL • Financial consolidations • Portal? • Push versus pull • Dashboards • Planning and budgeting • Income – in house development • Costs

  22. Summary • Positive outcome • Well received by all • Business led to address specific needs “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all” Peter Drucker • Phased approach essential to success • Need to start simple or risk delay • Don’t underestimate data issues

  23. Questions

  24. Drivers of law firm profitability Profits Partner Fees Staff Profits Fees Staff Partners = X X Efficiency Margin Leverage Fees Hours Hours Staff X Realisation Utilisation Source: David H Maister, Managing the Professional Services Firm 1993

More Related