Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Block quote
Ordered list
Unordered list
Bold text
Emphasis
Superscript
Subscript
Why global supply chain organisations invest in data and planning tools but still cannot answer the questions that matter most — and what changes when they fix that.
Learn more about this eventWorking with global procurement, supply chain and finance teams, I keep seeing the same situation. The organisation has invested in planning tools. The data exists somewhere. The teams are experienced. And yet a straightforward question — what is actually driving our cost increase in this market or region — still requires a request to the regional or local teams, a wait period for data collection and analysis, a manual consolidation, and by the time the answer arrives, the moment to act has passed, or the situation has changed. Rinse and repeat.
This is not a capability problem. The people involved are good at their jobs. It is a planning problem, and it is one that most large organisations have inherited or grown organically into.
Global procurement and supply chain functions have generally done a good job of building consolidated reporting. They can see total costs. They can track performance across regions. They can produce the numbers for the monthly review.
The gap is between seeing what happened and understanding why. High-level consolidation tells you the outcome. It does not tell you the cause. When a cost line moves in a market, the global team knows it moved. What they typically cannot do is trace back to the specific reason without going to the zone for the detail.
Most supply chain and finance leaders I speak to recognise this pattern immediately. The global function has visibility, but understanding still sits with the regions. Analysis takes longer than it should. Decisions are made on incomplete information. The planning cycle feels reactive because it is.
Keyrus has helped organisations work through this. The shift that makes the clearest difference is not replacing existing tools. It is connecting them in a way that puts the right level of detail in the hands of the people who need it, when they need it.
Connected planning is not the same as consolidated reporting. Consolidated reporting brings numbers together after they have been produced elsewhere. Connected planning means that all functions and levels can access the underlying detail directly, by market, by product, by cost driver, without needing teams to first prepare and package the data.
When organisations make this shift, the business value shows up quickly. Budgeting becomes more accurate because planners can compare assumptions across markets and catch inconsistencies before the plan is locked. A cost assumption that does not reflect what a comparable market is seeing gets corrected during planning, not after the year has started and the forecast assumptions are already off, or cannot easily be tracked back to budget.
Forecast accuracy improves too. When errors and anomalies surface earlier in the planning cycle, adjustments get made before they compound. The forecast reflects what is happening in the business, not a version assembled from regional submissions three weeks ago.
The most immediate benefit is time. The manual work of pulling data from multiple sources, reconciling discrepancies, and chasing explanations from regional teams reduces significantly. The time that frees up goes toward analysis and decision to support the work those teams are there to do, and most of them currently do not have the capacity for it in their current ways of working. Organisations working with Keyrus on connected planning consistently report a meaningful improvement in how quickly they can close and release results. Significant reductions in planning cycle times, insight and analysis built in, and real time scenario analysis unlock business value.
The reason connected planning is harder to achieve than it sounds comes down to how most large organisations have built their planning landscape evolving over time to meet changing circumstances.
The typical picture is a collection of separate tools, each built by a different team to solve a different problem that don’t talk to each other. Single point solution systems solving a specific problem tied together by excel to address shortcomings in ERP and or static BI reporting. A savings tracker here. A commodity model there. Supply chain financial data in a separate system. Each one built with good reason, none of them designed to work together.
When you try to create a coherent picture, inconsistencies surface. Data definitions do not always match across regions, countries or indeed across facilities. the data sits at different levels of granularity, data structures are inconsistent and not standardised. The answers to questions can vary dependent on where you started from.
The organisations that have resolved these challenges started from the questions the business needs to answer and built the planning structure around those questions. That means agreeing on a shared data foundation that all planning draws from and making connections between models deliberate rather than improvised.
It also means treating this as a programme, not a single project. Keyrus works with clients to sequence the work so each stage delivers visible value. The organisations that plan for value delivery are the ones that see improvement at each step.
A concern that comes up regularly is that global planning standards cannot work in organisations where regions operate very differently. Different systems. Different ways of working. Different definitions for the same cost categories. Different data hierarchies.
This is real complexity, particularly for organisations that have grown through acquisition. Standardising ways of working and data management can seem like a daunting task that will take a long time and business needs answers today. So the answer is not always to standardise how every region works. It is to be clear about what the business needs visibility of in order to make the right decisions, to see and give regions the flexibility to contribute in a way that suits their local context whilst proving an aggregation methodology that provides an aligned single view of performance and drivers. The planning layer becomes the common ground without requiring every region to operate identically beneath it.
When this is designed well, regional teams get a tool that is genuinely useful for their own planning, not just a data submission exercise for head office. When they see value in it for themselves, engagement naturally improves. Globally connected and locally adapted is the outcome that works for all stakeholders.
Particularly for organisations that have grown through mergers and acquisitions, this approach also means there is no waiting for full ERP harmonisation before building connected planning. That harmonisation may take years, and complete alignment may never happen. Better planning visibility can be achieved in short time periods without the huge investment of an ERP workover.
Want to see a real-world example of this journey? Our customer, a global consumer goods company, shared their connected planning story at an Anaplan event, covering the move from fragmented models to end-to-end supply chain planning.
If you want to know more about how Keyrus can support you on your connected planning journey, reach out to me or the team.
Working with global procurement, supply chain and finance teams, I keep seeing the same situation. The organisation has invested in planning tools. The data exists somewhere. The teams are experienced. And yet a straightforward question — what is actually driving our cost increase in this market or region — still requires a request to the regional or local teams, a wait period for data collection and analysis, a manual consolidation, and by the time the answer arrives, the moment to act has passed, or the situation has changed. Rinse and repeat.
This is not a capability problem. The people involved are good at their jobs. It is a planning problem, and it is one that most large organisations have inherited or grown organically into.
Global procurement and supply chain functions have generally done a good job of building consolidated reporting. They can see total costs. They can track performance across regions. They can produce the numbers for the monthly review.
The gap is between seeing what happened and understanding why. High-level consolidation tells you the outcome. It does not tell you the cause. When a cost line moves in a market, the global team knows it moved. What they typically cannot do is trace back to the specific reason without going to the zone for the detail.
Most supply chain and finance leaders I speak to recognise this pattern immediately. The global function has visibility, but understanding still sits with the regions. Analysis takes longer than it should. Decisions are made on incomplete information. The planning cycle feels reactive because it is.
Keyrus has helped organisations work through this. The shift that makes the clearest difference is not replacing existing tools. It is connecting them in a way that puts the right level of detail in the hands of the people who need it, when they need it.
Connected planning is not the same as consolidated reporting. Consolidated reporting brings numbers together after they have been produced elsewhere. Connected planning means that all functions and levels can access the underlying detail directly, by market, by product, by cost driver, without needing teams to first prepare and package the data.
When organisations make this shift, the business value shows up quickly. Budgeting becomes more accurate because planners can compare assumptions across markets and catch inconsistencies before the plan is locked. A cost assumption that does not reflect what a comparable market is seeing gets corrected during planning, not after the year has started and the forecast assumptions are already off, or cannot easily be tracked back to budget.
Forecast accuracy improves too. When errors and anomalies surface earlier in the planning cycle, adjustments get made before they compound. The forecast reflects what is happening in the business, not a version assembled from regional submissions three weeks ago.
The most immediate benefit is time. The manual work of pulling data from multiple sources, reconciling discrepancies, and chasing explanations from regional teams reduces significantly. The time that frees up goes toward analysis and decision to support the work those teams are there to do, and most of them currently do not have the capacity for it in their current ways of working. Organisations working with Keyrus on connected planning consistently report a meaningful improvement in how quickly they can close and release results. Significant reductions in planning cycle times, insight and analysis built in, and real time scenario analysis unlock business value.
The reason connected planning is harder to achieve than it sounds comes down to how most large organisations have built their planning landscape evolving over time to meet changing circumstances.
The typical picture is a collection of separate tools, each built by a different team to solve a different problem that don’t talk to each other. Single point solution systems solving a specific problem tied together by excel to address shortcomings in ERP and or static BI reporting. A savings tracker here. A commodity model there. Supply chain financial data in a separate system. Each one built with good reason, none of them designed to work together.
When you try to create a coherent picture, inconsistencies surface. Data definitions do not always match across regions, countries or indeed across facilities. the data sits at different levels of granularity, data structures are inconsistent and not standardised. The answers to questions can vary dependent on where you started from.
The organisations that have resolved these challenges started from the questions the business needs to answer and built the planning structure around those questions. That means agreeing on a shared data foundation that all planning draws from and making connections between models deliberate rather than improvised.
It also means treating this as a programme, not a single project. Keyrus works with clients to sequence the work so each stage delivers visible value. The organisations that plan for value delivery are the ones that see improvement at each step.
A concern that comes up regularly is that global planning standards cannot work in organisations where regions operate very differently. Different systems. Different ways of working. Different definitions for the same cost categories. Different data hierarchies.
This is real complexity, particularly for organisations that have grown through acquisition. Standardising ways of working and data management can seem like a daunting task that will take a long time and business needs answers today. So the answer is not always to standardise how every region works. It is to be clear about what the business needs visibility of in order to make the right decisions, to see and give regions the flexibility to contribute in a way that suits their local context whilst proving an aggregation methodology that provides an aligned single view of performance and drivers. The planning layer becomes the common ground without requiring every region to operate identically beneath it.
When this is designed well, regional teams get a tool that is genuinely useful for their own planning, not just a data submission exercise for head office. When they see value in it for themselves, engagement naturally improves. Globally connected and locally adapted is the outcome that works for all stakeholders.
Particularly for organisations that have grown through mergers and acquisitions, this approach also means there is no waiting for full ERP harmonisation before building connected planning. That harmonisation may take years, and complete alignment may never happen. Better planning visibility can be achieved in short time periods without the huge investment of an ERP workover.
Want to see a real-world example of this journey? Our customer, a global consumer goods company, shared their connected planning story at an Anaplan event, covering the move from fragmented models to end-to-end supply chain planning.
If you want to know more about how Keyrus can support you on your connected planning journey, reach out to me or the team.
Working with global procurement, supply chain and finance teams, I keep seeing the same situation. The organisation has invested in planning tools. The data exists somewhere. The teams are experienced. And yet a straightforward question — what is actually driving our cost increase in this market or region — still requires a request to the regional or local teams, a wait period for data collection and analysis, a manual consolidation, and by the time the answer arrives, the moment to act has passed, or the situation has changed. Rinse and repeat.
This is not a capability problem. The people involved are good at their jobs. It is a planning problem, and it is one that most large organisations have inherited or grown organically into.
Global procurement and supply chain functions have generally done a good job of building consolidated reporting. They can see total costs. They can track performance across regions. They can produce the numbers for the monthly review.
The gap is between seeing what happened and understanding why. High-level consolidation tells you the outcome. It does not tell you the cause. When a cost line moves in a market, the global team knows it moved. What they typically cannot do is trace back to the specific reason without going to the zone for the detail.
Most supply chain and finance leaders I speak to recognise this pattern immediately. The global function has visibility, but understanding still sits with the regions. Analysis takes longer than it should. Decisions are made on incomplete information. The planning cycle feels reactive because it is.
Keyrus has helped organisations work through this. The shift that makes the clearest difference is not replacing existing tools. It is connecting them in a way that puts the right level of detail in the hands of the people who need it, when they need it.
Connected planning is not the same as consolidated reporting. Consolidated reporting brings numbers together after they have been produced elsewhere. Connected planning means that all functions and levels can access the underlying detail directly, by market, by product, by cost driver, without needing teams to first prepare and package the data.
When organisations make this shift, the business value shows up quickly. Budgeting becomes more accurate because planners can compare assumptions across markets and catch inconsistencies before the plan is locked. A cost assumption that does not reflect what a comparable market is seeing gets corrected during planning, not after the year has started and the forecast assumptions are already off, or cannot easily be tracked back to budget.
Forecast accuracy improves too. When errors and anomalies surface earlier in the planning cycle, adjustments get made before they compound. The forecast reflects what is happening in the business, not a version assembled from regional submissions three weeks ago.
The most immediate benefit is time. The manual work of pulling data from multiple sources, reconciling discrepancies, and chasing explanations from regional teams reduces significantly. The time that frees up goes toward analysis and decision to support the work those teams are there to do, and most of them currently do not have the capacity for it in their current ways of working. Organisations working with Keyrus on connected planning consistently report a meaningful improvement in how quickly they can close and release results. Significant reductions in planning cycle times, insight and analysis built in, and real time scenario analysis unlock business value.
The reason connected planning is harder to achieve than it sounds comes down to how most large organisations have built their planning landscape evolving over time to meet changing circumstances.
The typical picture is a collection of separate tools, each built by a different team to solve a different problem that don’t talk to each other. Single point solution systems solving a specific problem tied together by excel to address shortcomings in ERP and or static BI reporting. A savings tracker here. A commodity model there. Supply chain financial data in a separate system. Each one built with good reason, none of them designed to work together.
When you try to create a coherent picture, inconsistencies surface. Data definitions do not always match across regions, countries or indeed across facilities. the data sits at different levels of granularity, data structures are inconsistent and not standardised. The answers to questions can vary dependent on where you started from.
The organisations that have resolved these challenges started from the questions the business needs to answer and built the planning structure around those questions. That means agreeing on a shared data foundation that all planning draws from and making connections between models deliberate rather than improvised.
It also means treating this as a programme, not a single project. Keyrus works with clients to sequence the work so each stage delivers visible value. The organisations that plan for value delivery are the ones that see improvement at each step.
A concern that comes up regularly is that global planning standards cannot work in organisations where regions operate very differently. Different systems. Different ways of working. Different definitions for the same cost categories. Different data hierarchies.
This is real complexity, particularly for organisations that have grown through acquisition. Standardising ways of working and data management can seem like a daunting task that will take a long time and business needs answers today. So the answer is not always to standardise how every region works. It is to be clear about what the business needs visibility of in order to make the right decisions, to see and give regions the flexibility to contribute in a way that suits their local context whilst proving an aggregation methodology that provides an aligned single view of performance and drivers. The planning layer becomes the common ground without requiring every region to operate identically beneath it.
When this is designed well, regional teams get a tool that is genuinely useful for their own planning, not just a data submission exercise for head office. When they see value in it for themselves, engagement naturally improves. Globally connected and locally adapted is the outcome that works for all stakeholders.
Particularly for organisations that have grown through mergers and acquisitions, this approach also means there is no waiting for full ERP harmonisation before building connected planning. That harmonisation may take years, and complete alignment may never happen. Better planning visibility can be achieved in short time periods without the huge investment of an ERP workover.
Want to see a real-world example of this journey? Our customer, a global consumer goods company, shared their connected planning story at an Anaplan event, covering the move from fragmented models to end-to-end supply chain planning.
If you want to know more about how Keyrus can support you on your connected planning journey, reach out to me or the team.
Working with global procurement, supply chain and finance teams, I keep seeing the same situation. The organisation has invested in planning tools. The data exists somewhere. The teams are experienced. And yet a straightforward question — what is actually driving our cost increase in this market or region — still requires a request to the regional or local teams, a wait period for data collection and analysis, a manual consolidation, and by the time the answer arrives, the moment to act has passed, or the situation has changed. Rinse and repeat.
This is not a capability problem. The people involved are good at their jobs. It is a planning problem, and it is one that most large organisations have inherited or grown organically into.
Global procurement and supply chain functions have generally done a good job of building consolidated reporting. They can see total costs. They can track performance across regions. They can produce the numbers for the monthly review.
The gap is between seeing what happened and understanding why. High-level consolidation tells you the outcome. It does not tell you the cause. When a cost line moves in a market, the global team knows it moved. What they typically cannot do is trace back to the specific reason without going to the zone for the detail.
Most supply chain and finance leaders I speak to recognise this pattern immediately. The global function has visibility, but understanding still sits with the regions. Analysis takes longer than it should. Decisions are made on incomplete information. The planning cycle feels reactive because it is.
Keyrus has helped organisations work through this. The shift that makes the clearest difference is not replacing existing tools. It is connecting them in a way that puts the right level of detail in the hands of the people who need it, when they need it.
Connected planning is not the same as consolidated reporting. Consolidated reporting brings numbers together after they have been produced elsewhere. Connected planning means that all functions and levels can access the underlying detail directly, by market, by product, by cost driver, without needing teams to first prepare and package the data.
When organisations make this shift, the business value shows up quickly. Budgeting becomes more accurate because planners can compare assumptions across markets and catch inconsistencies before the plan is locked. A cost assumption that does not reflect what a comparable market is seeing gets corrected during planning, not after the year has started and the forecast assumptions are already off, or cannot easily be tracked back to budget.
Forecast accuracy improves too. When errors and anomalies surface earlier in the planning cycle, adjustments get made before they compound. The forecast reflects what is happening in the business, not a version assembled from regional submissions three weeks ago.
The most immediate benefit is time. The manual work of pulling data from multiple sources, reconciling discrepancies, and chasing explanations from regional teams reduces significantly. The time that frees up goes toward analysis and decision to support the work those teams are there to do, and most of them currently do not have the capacity for it in their current ways of working. Organisations working with Keyrus on connected planning consistently report a meaningful improvement in how quickly they can close and release results. Significant reductions in planning cycle times, insight and analysis built in, and real time scenario analysis unlock business value.
The reason connected planning is harder to achieve than it sounds comes down to how most large organisations have built their planning landscape evolving over time to meet changing circumstances.
The typical picture is a collection of separate tools, each built by a different team to solve a different problem that don’t talk to each other. Single point solution systems solving a specific problem tied together by excel to address shortcomings in ERP and or static BI reporting. A savings tracker here. A commodity model there. Supply chain financial data in a separate system. Each one built with good reason, none of them designed to work together.
When you try to create a coherent picture, inconsistencies surface. Data definitions do not always match across regions, countries or indeed across facilities. the data sits at different levels of granularity, data structures are inconsistent and not standardised. The answers to questions can vary dependent on where you started from.
The organisations that have resolved these challenges started from the questions the business needs to answer and built the planning structure around those questions. That means agreeing on a shared data foundation that all planning draws from and making connections between models deliberate rather than improvised.
It also means treating this as a programme, not a single project. Keyrus works with clients to sequence the work so each stage delivers visible value. The organisations that plan for value delivery are the ones that see improvement at each step.
A concern that comes up regularly is that global planning standards cannot work in organisations where regions operate very differently. Different systems. Different ways of working. Different definitions for the same cost categories. Different data hierarchies.
This is real complexity, particularly for organisations that have grown through acquisition. Standardising ways of working and data management can seem like a daunting task that will take a long time and business needs answers today. So the answer is not always to standardise how every region works. It is to be clear about what the business needs visibility of in order to make the right decisions, to see and give regions the flexibility to contribute in a way that suits their local context whilst proving an aggregation methodology that provides an aligned single view of performance and drivers. The planning layer becomes the common ground without requiring every region to operate identically beneath it.
When this is designed well, regional teams get a tool that is genuinely useful for their own planning, not just a data submission exercise for head office. When they see value in it for themselves, engagement naturally improves. Globally connected and locally adapted is the outcome that works for all stakeholders.
Particularly for organisations that have grown through mergers and acquisitions, this approach also means there is no waiting for full ERP harmonisation before building connected planning. That harmonisation may take years, and complete alignment may never happen. Better planning visibility can be achieved in short time periods without the huge investment of an ERP workover.
Want to see a real-world example of this journey? Our customer, a global consumer goods company, shared their connected planning story at an Anaplan event, covering the move from fragmented models to end-to-end supply chain planning.
If you want to know more about how Keyrus can support you on your connected planning journey, reach out to me or the team.
Working with global procurement, supply chain and finance teams, I keep seeing the same situation. The organisation has invested in planning tools. The data exists somewhere. The teams are experienced. And yet a straightforward question — what is actually driving our cost increase in this market or region — still requires a request to the regional or local teams, a wait period for data collection and analysis, a manual consolidation, and by the time the answer arrives, the moment to act has passed, or the situation has changed. Rinse and repeat.
This is not a capability problem. The people involved are good at their jobs. It is a planning problem, and it is one that most large organisations have inherited or grown organically into.
Global procurement and supply chain functions have generally done a good job of building consolidated reporting. They can see total costs. They can track performance across regions. They can produce the numbers for the monthly review.
The gap is between seeing what happened and understanding why. High-level consolidation tells you the outcome. It does not tell you the cause. When a cost line moves in a market, the global team knows it moved. What they typically cannot do is trace back to the specific reason without going to the zone for the detail.
Most supply chain and finance leaders I speak to recognise this pattern immediately. The global function has visibility, but understanding still sits with the regions. Analysis takes longer than it should. Decisions are made on incomplete information. The planning cycle feels reactive because it is.
Keyrus has helped organisations work through this. The shift that makes the clearest difference is not replacing existing tools. It is connecting them in a way that puts the right level of detail in the hands of the people who need it, when they need it.
Connected planning is not the same as consolidated reporting. Consolidated reporting brings numbers together after they have been produced elsewhere. Connected planning means that all functions and levels can access the underlying detail directly, by market, by product, by cost driver, without needing teams to first prepare and package the data.
When organisations make this shift, the business value shows up quickly. Budgeting becomes more accurate because planners can compare assumptions across markets and catch inconsistencies before the plan is locked. A cost assumption that does not reflect what a comparable market is seeing gets corrected during planning, not after the year has started and the forecast assumptions are already off, or cannot easily be tracked back to budget.
Forecast accuracy improves too. When errors and anomalies surface earlier in the planning cycle, adjustments get made before they compound. The forecast reflects what is happening in the business, not a version assembled from regional submissions three weeks ago.
The most immediate benefit is time. The manual work of pulling data from multiple sources, reconciling discrepancies, and chasing explanations from regional teams reduces significantly. The time that frees up goes toward analysis and decision to support the work those teams are there to do, and most of them currently do not have the capacity for it in their current ways of working. Organisations working with Keyrus on connected planning consistently report a meaningful improvement in how quickly they can close and release results. Significant reductions in planning cycle times, insight and analysis built in, and real time scenario analysis unlock business value.
The reason connected planning is harder to achieve than it sounds comes down to how most large organisations have built their planning landscape evolving over time to meet changing circumstances.
The typical picture is a collection of separate tools, each built by a different team to solve a different problem that don’t talk to each other. Single point solution systems solving a specific problem tied together by excel to address shortcomings in ERP and or static BI reporting. A savings tracker here. A commodity model there. Supply chain financial data in a separate system. Each one built with good reason, none of them designed to work together.
When you try to create a coherent picture, inconsistencies surface. Data definitions do not always match across regions, countries or indeed across facilities. the data sits at different levels of granularity, data structures are inconsistent and not standardised. The answers to questions can vary dependent on where you started from.
The organisations that have resolved these challenges started from the questions the business needs to answer and built the planning structure around those questions. That means agreeing on a shared data foundation that all planning draws from and making connections between models deliberate rather than improvised.
It also means treating this as a programme, not a single project. Keyrus works with clients to sequence the work so each stage delivers visible value. The organisations that plan for value delivery are the ones that see improvement at each step.
A concern that comes up regularly is that global planning standards cannot work in organisations where regions operate very differently. Different systems. Different ways of working. Different definitions for the same cost categories. Different data hierarchies.
This is real complexity, particularly for organisations that have grown through acquisition. Standardising ways of working and data management can seem like a daunting task that will take a long time and business needs answers today. So the answer is not always to standardise how every region works. It is to be clear about what the business needs visibility of in order to make the right decisions, to see and give regions the flexibility to contribute in a way that suits their local context whilst proving an aggregation methodology that provides an aligned single view of performance and drivers. The planning layer becomes the common ground without requiring every region to operate identically beneath it.
When this is designed well, regional teams get a tool that is genuinely useful for their own planning, not just a data submission exercise for head office. When they see value in it for themselves, engagement naturally improves. Globally connected and locally adapted is the outcome that works for all stakeholders.
Particularly for organisations that have grown through mergers and acquisitions, this approach also means there is no waiting for full ERP harmonisation before building connected planning. That harmonisation may take years, and complete alignment may never happen. Better planning visibility can be achieved in short time periods without the huge investment of an ERP workover.
Want to see a real-world example of this journey? Our customer, a global consumer goods company, shared their connected planning story at an Anaplan event, covering the move from fragmented models to end-to-end supply chain planning.
If you want to know more about how Keyrus can support you on your connected planning journey, reach out to me or the team.
Access the full details of this key play, and have it on the go. Available as a PDF.
Have questions about our EPM solutions? Our team is ready to help you find the right approach for your business.
