finance transformation in an ict support organisation a...

by Nathalie Demeere, Luc Lutin, Stijn Viaene, Olivier Jolyon

Finance transformation in an ICT support organisationA case study at the Belgian Railways ICTRA

Foreword 3 Introduction: challenges and strategic intent 4 •Externalchallenges 4 •Internalchallenges 5 • Strategicintent 5 Transforming ICTRA 6 Finance transformation project 8 •Establishcommitment 8 •Gaincredibility 8 •Provecompetence 10 Outcome 12 Howtosuccessfullyimplementafinancetransformationproject 13 Glossary 14 Acknowledgements 14 Contact 15

Content

Finance transformation in an ICT support organisation Case study 3

In 2009 ICTRA’s Finance Department embarked on a journey to radically transform itself, with the help of Deloitte. The same year Deloitte and Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School also began a journey together. They jointly founded the Deloitte Research Chair “Bringing ICT to Board Level”, with a commitment to producing world-class research on topics at the heart of the relationship between business and ICT. A year later Nathalie Demeere, Manager at Deloitte, started her own journey to complete an Executive Master Class in Controllership with Vlerick. These paths come together in this article. Sammie Courtens, ICTRA’s Head of Finance, kindly allowed Nathalie, as part of her Vlerick course, to investigate the ins and outs of ICTRA’s Finance transformation. She chronicled this two-year project through interviews and close collaboration with the team involved. The following pages distil the essence of this research. They are the product of a joint effort by Deloitte and Vlerick to closely engage with the business and scrutinise what matters to it and to ICT.

Foreword

Christian Combes Eric Callewaert Stijn Viaene

ICTRA is short for Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for Rail1. Operating as a shared services centre, it provides ICT development and support services to the entire Belgian Railways Group. This article first outlines the external and internal challenges ICTRA faced that provided the context for the finance transformation. It then describes how ICTRA set out to realise its ambition of becoming a reliable partner to the business. Finally, it discusses the outcome of the finance transformation and offers advice for ICT organisations with similar ambitions.

External challengesRun as a government monopoly, NMBS/SNCB2, the national railway company of Belgium, was used to evolving at its own pace. With the upcoming liberalisation and privatisation of Europe’s railway system, it needed to prepare for a more demanding environment. This required a clear strategy to cope with increased competition. The company would need to be able to respond more quickly and accurately to rapidly changing market demands. Internal reorganisation was therefore a must.

Consequently, in 2005 NMBS/SNCB was reorganised into three separate entities (Figure 1). The railway operator (NMBS/SNCB) would be responsible for freight and passenger services as well as the management of all rolling stock. Infrabel would be responsible for maintaining, renovating and developing the Belgian railway network infrastructure. NMBS/SNCB Holding, the umbrella organisation and owner of the operator NMBS/SNCB and Infrabel, would be responsible for asset management, human resources, strategy, finance and ICT. The above three entities together formed the Belgian Railways Group. See insert for some facts & figures.

Introduction: challenges and strategic intent

BelgianRailwaysGroupfacts&figures (situation 2010)

NMBS/SNCB Holding•GroupCEO=JannieHaek•GroupCFO=MichelAllé•ICTRAGeneralManager=GiovanniPalmieri*,

also serves as Group CIO•ICTRAHeadofFinance=SammieCourtens,reportingtoGiovanniPalmieri,withdottedlinetoGroup CFO

NMBS/SNCB (Operator) and Infrabel:•NMBS/SNCB(Operator)GeneralDirector=

Marc Descheemaecker•InfrabelGeneralDirector=LucLallemand•

549 stations and stops•approx.4,600trains/dayusetheBelgianrailway

network•224.3millionpassengersservedin2010•39milliontonsofgoodstransportedin2010

A division of NMBS/SNCB Holding, ICTRA is the preferred supplier of ICT services to the 40,000 employees working in the three entities of the Belgian Railways Group. TheactivitiesofICTRA’s935internalemployeesand600contractorscanbedividedintothreecategories:(1) standard operational/supply activities; (2) development and maintenance of applications; and (3)implementationofstrategicprojects.

Figure 1: Structure of the Belgian Railways Group since 2005 (situation 2010)

Deliver ICT development & support services

NMBS/SNCB Holding(holding)

INFRABEL(infrastructure)

NMBS/SNCB(operator)

Finance

HR

Stations

ICTRA

*EricMercierisnowreplacingPalmieri

4

Introduction: challenges and strategic intent

Internal challengesFollowing the reorganisation in 2005, ICTRA became the preferred supplier of ICT services to the three business entities of the Belgian Railways Group (the Group). Its activities could be divided into three categories: (1) standard operational/supply activities, such as the ICT helpdesk and hardware support; (2) development and maintenance of applications, such as e-ticketing; and (3)implementationofstrategicprojects,e.g.real-timepassengerinformationsystemsandERP(EnterpriseResourcePlanning)applications.

Over the years, the Group’s business entities grew dissatisfied with ICTRA’s services as well as the transfer pricing mechanism. They felt ICTRA’s services did not meet their needs. As for the budgets, they had the impression they were signing a blank cheque at the start of each financial year. Although the ICT budgets were discussed as part of the budget cycle, ICTRA charged actual costs with almost no explanation. The business wanted to be notified of changes and their impact on the actual budget in advance, instead of having to learn about them through the invoice. The business entities also wanted to have a say in the make-or-buy decision, i.e. in the choice between ICTRA and external service providers. This meant that they wanted ICTRA to submit a formal offer, detailing scope, timing and pricing.

In short: the business entities wanted to be treated as a customer, receiving high-quality services at a fair price.

Strategic intentIn 2008, ICTRA formulated a new vision to address the external and internal challenges.

As a support organisation, ICTRA wanted to be recognised for its strong technological know-how and experienced ICT employees. It would seek to continuously improve the productivity of its services, while matching supply to demand.

ICTRA therefore had to become a partner who understands the needs of the business. To ensure optimal delivery of business value, it would have to deliver total solutions, from development to utilisation.

“ICTRA’s vision is built on two pillars. First, becoming a true partner to the business. Second, delivering total solutions.” Sammie Courtens, ICTRA Head of Finance


6

To achieve its vision, ICTRA embarked on a transformation path. At the heart of ICTRA’s transformation was a fundamental review of its internal financial processes.

In 2008, ICTRA launched its Finance Transformation Project. This project would help address the following major issues that had contributed to the dissatisfaction felt by ICTRA’s internal customers:•ICTRA’sservicecataloguewasnotalignedwiththe

requirements of the business entities.•ICTRA’sserviceslackedthetransparentpricing

mechanisms of external providers.•ICTRA’sinternalfinancialbusinessprocesseswere

cumbersome, lacked structure and tools, and did not involve stakeholders sufficiently.

•TherewasanoveralllackofcostawarenesswithintheICTRA organisation.

TheFinanceTransformationProjectwouldincreaseoperational process effectiveness in order to ensure a more customer-oriented service delivery. It consisted of three phases: (1) establish commitment, (2) gain credibilityand(3)provecompetence.Theprojectwasled by Sammie Courtens, ICTRA’s Head of Finance. GiovanniPalmieri,ICTRA’sGeneralManagerandGroupCIO, was the project’s sponsor.

InparallelwiththeFinanceTransformationProject,ICTRA adapted its organisation to a so-called target operating model (see insert). The finance transformation and organisational restructuring went hand in hand with a formal change management (Figure 2).

Transforming ICTRA

Figure 2: Transforming ICTRA

ExternalChallenges

InternalChallenges

NEED FOR CHANGE

Target Operating Model

Change Management

Establish Commitment

ProveCompetence

Gain Credibility

Target operating modelTo support optimal delivery of business value, ICTRA adopted a new operating model. This target operating model clearly distinguished between demand-oriented and supply-oriented responsibilities. By adapting its organisation to this model, ICTRA would be able to put the right focus on the business. ICTRA therefore decided to migrate from a functional structure to a matrixorganisation(Figure3).Thisneworganisationalstructure was designed to support business-oriented servicing and divided the ICTRA organisation in “shared operations supply units” on the one hand and “business entity solution units” on the other. These units would be supported by a number of “support departments”, such as Finance.

The shared operations supply units, or supply units, were structured around broad capabilities and transversal processes (network device & solutions, infrastructure & operations, and standard solutions). Their focus would be on cost efficiency and quality.

The business entity solution units, or demand units, were in charge of service and solution development for the respective Group business entities. These demand units were supported by account managers, performing a liaison role between ICTRA and the business. Together, they would drive process improvement and project design. Their aim was to be as close to the business as possible, increase ICT effectiveness and improve customer satisfaction.

Business Entity Solution Units (Business Solution Backbone)

ICTRA

Ticketing & Mobility

Planning & Freight

Traffic & Railways

Shared Operations Supply Units

Standard Solutions Backbone

Network Device Solutions Backbone

Infrastructure & Operations Backbone

Development as a Service

Support Departments (e.g.

Finance, HR)

Figure3:Neworganisationalstructure


8

The aim of this project was to increase operational process effectiveness in order to ensure a more business-oriented approach to service delivery. The project consisted of three phases: (1) establish commitment, (2)gaincredibilityand(3)provecompetence.

Establish commitmentGetting the business on board was essential to the success of the finance transformation. Therefore, ICTRA initiated discussions with the business entities of the Group, which resulted in the joint development of a business-specific service catalogue.

This catalogue then served as a basis for establishing service level agreements (SLAs) per service and per business entity. Service level negotiations between the business entities and ICTRA were guided by the following values: customer focus, appropriate level of detail, completeness of scope, clarity, and delivery credibility. SLAs would typically contain a detailed description of the services offered as well as a specification of the required service levels, a pricing per service item, and key performance indicators.

Business entities could choose their desired service levels. For example, a “gold package” for the ticketing machines would include 24-hour support, while a “bronze package”, more appropriate for less critical applications, would only offer support during working hours.

It was also agreed that the pricing per service would be determined using a cost chargeback model (see next section). This model would enable ICTRA to accurately charge costs made for the delivery of its services to the consumers of these services, based on actual consumption.

When engaging with the business in this first phase, ICTRA was guided by the motto “Deliver what you promise”. The collaborative development of the service catalogue and service level agreements was aimed at gaining the necessary commitment from all stakeholders - both ICTRA and the business.

Gain credibilityTo become a trusted business partner, ICTRA needed to determine a fair price for its services. Also, it had to communicate clearly and explain its invoices and any deviations from the budget to its customers, i.e. the business entities of the Group.

A key step in gaining credibility with the business was the development of the cost chargeback model. This model would:•makeICTcostsmorepredictable and transparent as

they would be based on the actual quantity of services delivered. Through the model ICTRA would also provide more details on the cost drivers of its services.

•increasecost awareness and help understand service profitability for the purpose of cost control.

•be benchmarked regularly with internal and external alternatives and offer the flexibility to change costing according to new business developments.

There are many ways to recoup the cost of delivering a service. The approach followed by ICTRA was to first calculate the cost per service item (“service costing”), then set a service unit transfer price to cover the costs and stimulate desirable demand for their services, and finally multiply the unit price by the quantity of service delivered (“transfer pricing”).

Finance transformation project

“Using the most appropriate transfer pricing strategy for our services has allowed ICTRA to influence business decisions.” Sammie Courtens, ICTRA Head of Finance

The steps of ICTRA’s cost chargeback model are outlined in more detail in Figure 4 below.

First, the costs identified in the “general ledger” were allocated to “basic cost objects” (e.g. servers, cameras, IP).Thesecostswerethenallocatedto“ICTRAservicecatalogue items” (e.g. application hosting, connectivity, telephone, security, reporting) according to an allocation logic. The result was a service unit cost for each item in the service catalogue.

The service unit transfer price resulted from adjusting the service unit cost according to four pricing strategy principles:•Commercial strategy: transfer prices were compared

with market prices and set competitively. •Technological strategy: the use of technology

supported by ICTRA was favoured in terms of transfer price. Unsupported technology, which would be more expensive to service, was penalised.

•Service level agreements: the difference in service levels (e.g. gold, silver and bronze) was reflected in the transfer price.

•Transfer pricing of prior years: to avoid excessive differences between the old transfer prices and transfer prices calculated with the new cost chargeback model, it was decided that transfer prices should only gradually change.

The cost chargeback model was developed, tested and fine-tuned iteratively by ICTRA and extensively explained to the Group’s business entities. To support this effort, ICTRA’s Finance department made sure to provide the necessary cost management training to ICTRA’s non-financial staff. Not only did this improve the understanding of financial issues, it also helped to create a shared language, which in turn optimised the alignment of all parties involved.

The cost chargeback model was also used for reporting: (1) on the cost of service delivery for each ICTRA supply and demand unit and (2) on the profitability per service, per ICTRA supply and demand unit and per customer (Group business entity).

Service Costing

GeneralLedger CostIdentification

Allocation Logic

Reporting oncosts for each

ICTRA unit

Reporting oncosts

per service

ICTRA ServiceCatalogue

(e.g. telephone, security,

reporting)

Basic Cost Objects

(e.g. servers, cameras)

ServiceConsumption

Reporting onprofitability per service

per customer and for each

ICTRA unit

Transfer Pricing

Figure 4: Cost chargeback model



10

Prove competenceThe ultimate test for the new cost chargeback model was whether it would survive the budget cycle.

The existing budgeting process had already caused a lot of frustration for the Group’s business entities. ICT budgets only seemed to increase year after year and could not be questioned. The Group’s business entities felt like signing a blank cheque, authorising ICTRA to spend without trying to improve its operating efficiency. Another cause of frustration was the time needed to determine the budget.

ICTRA had also identified inefficiencies in the existing budgeting process: it lacked formal guidelines, standard templates and definitions, as well as validation opportunities. Neither business requirements nor cost trend analyses were taken into account. From ICTRA’s point of view, ICT budgets often seemed inconsistent and lacked ownership.

To overcome these shortcomings, a new budgeting process was designed combining a top-down and a bottom-up approach.

Redesigned budgeting processIn the new budgeting process, a budget cycle started with Group Management translating the three-to-five-year strategy into a tactical business plan for the next year, setting clear priorities and targets for ICTRA (top-down).

For ICTRA, the first step in the new budgeting process was the detailed business demand planning. Each of ICTRA’s business entity solution units (demand units) worked with its Group business entity counterpart to paint a complete picture of the required services. The detailed demand plans consisted of the predicted quantities for each service catalogue item (the result of historical data analysis combined with expectations) as well as the desired service levels. Standard templates were designed with the help of ICTRA’s Finance department to streamline information processing and to enable a constructive dialogue.

The detailed demand plans were then translated into detailed budget plans with cost (i.e. resource needs) and profitability information for each ICTRA unit and the business counterparts. The final agreed-upon budget plan for a business entity solution unit would

typically be the result of several iterations, involving its Group business entity counterpart and ICTRA’s Finance department. The latter also took care of consolidating the budgets and reporting back to Group Management (bottom-up). To this end, an information system was put in place to enable efficient centralisation of, and reporting on, all budgeting data, and to replace the overload of spreadsheets.

Benefits of the new budgeting processThe new budgeting process provided for clear management routines3. Standard templates facilitated efficient data exchange and analysis as well as populating the cost chargeback model. Financial accuracy and transparency had improved and budgets had become more predictable at the different levels as ICTRA’s non-financial managers and the Group’s business entity managers had improved their understanding of financial and service delivery concepts.


EmbeddedchangeMoving forward to achieve its strategic intent required a shift in the mind-set of ICTRA management and staff. The organisational restructuring and the finance transformation therefore went hand in hand with a formal change management. Its aim was to:•communicate ICTRA’s ambitions.•raise awareness with all of ICTRA’s staff on

business-oriented servicing and strengthen the relationship between ICTRA and its customers, i.e. the Group’s business entities.

•Providecostmanagement training to ICTRA’s non-financial managers to create high-performing teams.

The change management was rooted in five core values: passion, engagement, empowerment, respect, and peer collaboration among equals, which enabled change to occur as naturally as possible.

“This change wasn’t forced, which has definitely contributed to the success of the transformation,” Sammie Courtens said, looking back. He believed this is why the transformation has also led to a radical cultural change: “In the process the business and ICT teams have established a strong relation of mutual trust, working together as one professional team. As a result, ICTRA has gained credibility with the business entities of the Belgian Railways Group.The change management was a continuous process rooted in five core values. ICTRA did not yet reach the endpoint, but a daily focus is still put on continuously improving the process.”


Credibility was no longer subjective but objective and quantifiable. Managers who were unable to adapt supply to demand would end up with non-rechargeable costs that they would have to explain to ICTRA’s General Manager and ICTRA’s Head of Finance.

The standardised budget cycle resulted in more reliable budget-setting. During the formal budget validation process ICTRA’s Finance department would challenge the budgets, while ICTRA’s account managers would liaise between the Group’s business entities and ICTRA. This helped ICTRA to ensure its budgets were in line with business requirements and expectations. Because the jointly-developed service catalogue offered services responding to real business needs rather than standard services defined by ICTRA, the Group’s business entities and ICTRA felt they were working as a team. The result: well thought-through services and projects, and improved business satisfaction.

12

To achieve the strategic intent to transform into a high-performing business-oriented support organisation for ICT services, ICTRA embarked on a transformation. At the heart of this transformation was the Finance TransformationProject.

The project started with establishing commitment from to the Group’s business entities. Constructive discussions between ICTRA and these business entities resulted in an agreement on important services, reflected in a service catalogue and new service level agreements.

ICTRA was challenged to make its invoices more credible. A new cost chargeback model was developed and a transfer pricing strategy was established. As a result, the prices charged were rooted in insight into the costs of service delivery, taking into account the required service levels. The transfer pricing strategy was such that it also stimulated desirable demand. Understanding each other’s position was crucial in strengthening the relationship between ICTRA and the Group’s business entities. ICTRA’s account managers played an important role as single point of contact for the business.

Puttingthecostchargebackmodeltothetestofthebudget cycle proved its value to both ICTRA and the Group’s business entities. The reviewed budgeting process was much more efficient, which allowed for more time spent on analysis and enabled more focus on the needs of the business.

ICTRA’s Head of Finance, Sammie Courtens, concluded as follows: “With the help of this finance transformation ICTRA is now better prepared for the liberalised market. Our service catalogue has enabled us to map and understand our offering to the business. Managers at ICTRA’s demand and supply units have changed their mind-set completely. Not only do they now understand the real business requirements for ICT, they also focus more on cost effectiveness and operational efficiency.”

Outcome


How to successfully implement a finance transformation

ICTRA’s finance transformation project can serve as a blueprint for your ICT organisation.

1.Establish commitmentDefine overall company strategy with top management for the next three to five years. Take into account external factors (market evolution, business requests) and internal factors (internal projects, company vision). Start building your service catalogue and negotiate service levels involving finance early in the process to prepare for the next steps. Think big, but start small. One single, all-encompassing service catalogue would be ideal, but if this is too ambitious, better leave it for later and start off with the services for which there is buy-in from the business.

2. Gain credibilityDevelop a cost chargeback model that calculates a cost for each service item in your catalogue. With this cost analysis as a starting point, determine a transfer pricing strategy that takes into account commercial considerations, service levels and your organisation’s technology strategy. Transfer pricing based on such a strategy is the vehicle par excellence to steer business behaviour and stimulate desired demand for ICT services. Close collaboration between the business, ICT and finance is important at this stage.

3. Prove competenceIntegrate your cost chargeback model into a standardised budgeting process. This process ideally combines top-down and bottom-up views and inputs. Construct financial budgets based on real business demands and have these budgets validated by the business. Again, close collaboration between the business, ICT and finance is vital for success. Remember that it is important that you update and involve your business counterparts regularly, not only to gain buy-in, but also to show what you are capable of offering.

14

•AService Level Agreement is a contract in which the service level is formally defined. It typically includes details on the performance expected from a service, how it is measured and what the consequences are when the service is not delivered according to the contract.

•AService Catalogue is a listing of services used by an ICT department to list its offerings to the business.

•Transfer pricing is the process by which related parties (entities in the same group) set the prices at which they pass goods and services.

•Anoperating model is the representation of how an organisation operates across process, people and technology in order to deliver value defined by the business.

•Acost chargeback model controls costs by charging the costs of a support organisation to the consumers of the services provided by that support organisation.

The authors would like to thank the many people that have contributed to this research project. We are deeply grateful to Sammie Courtens and Thierry Lemaire, who kindly dedicated some of their time to support this research. We would also like to express our appreciation to Guy-Louis de le Vingne, Yoann Busigny, Maxime de Villenfagne de Vogelsanck and Ann Bailleul.

Glossary

Acknowledgements

End notes

1. This article was written as the basis for discussion, rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a business situation.

2.TheNMBS/SNCBwasfoundedin1926.NMBS/SNCB stands for “Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen” (NMBS)inDutchand“SociétéNationaledesChemins de fer Belges” (SNCB) in French.

3.ThebudgetingprocessinvolvesmanagersofICTRA units, ICTRA’s Finance department and the Group’s business entities.

ContactsNathalie Demeere is manager at Deloitte Consulting Belgium, within the Finance Transformation Services. ShespecialisesinIntegratedPerformanceManagementand Management Controlling, and covers many aspects of financial management in different industries.

Contact her at [email protected]. Tel.+32479901662Address:Deloitte,Berkenlaan8c,1831Diegem,Belgium

Luc Lutin is senior research associate at Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Belgium. His research interests include business-IT alignment, management controlling and IT leadership.

Contact him at [email protected]. Tel.+3216248857Address: Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Vlamingenstraat83,3000Leuven,Belgium.

Stijn Viaene is a tenured professor of management and IT at KU Leuven, Belgium and a partner of Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, where he chairs the Competence Centre Operations & Technology Management. He is holder of the Vlerick Research Chair on “Bringing IT to Board Level” endowed by Deloitte Consulting. His research zooms in on the many managerial issues in business-IT alignment and information systems management, with a particular interest in realising the benefits from business intelligence systems.

Contact him at [email protected]. Tel.+3216248845Address: Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Vlamingenstraat83,3000Leuven,Belgium.

Olivier Jolyon is senior manager at Deloitte Consulting Belgium, within Technology Advisory Services. He specialises in IT effectiveness and covers many aspects of IT management, with a particular focus on the financial management of IT and a special interest in business-IT alignment.

Contact him at [email protected].+32479903148Address:Deloitte,Berkenlaan8c,1831Diegem,Belgium

Christian Combes is partner at Deloitte Consulting Belgium, within the Technology Advisory Services. He specialises in advising CIOs on the management of technology, from strategy definition to large transformations.

Contact him at [email protected]. Tel.+32497596358Address: Deloitte, Berkenlaan 8c, 1831Diegem,Belgium

EricCallewaert is partner at Deloitte Consulting Belgium, within the Finance Transformation Services. He specialises in finance transformation projects and management controlling, and covers many aspects of financial management and performance management in different industries.

Contact him at [email protected]. Tel.+32495594941Address:Deloitte,Berkenlaan8c,1831Diegem,Belgium

AboutVlerickLeuvenGentManagementSchoolVlerickLeuvenGentManagementSchoolhasdeepacademicroots.Foundedin1953byProfessorBaronAndréVlerick,theSchoolhasevolvedinto the leading business school in Belgium and one of the top business schools in Europe. The School benefits from the amassed knowledgeof the two largest Belgian universities, Ghent University and the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School focuses on management education and research to meet the needs of managers and entrepreneursat different stages in their careers. The School offers an International MBA programme and numerous training programmes for companyexecutives. Close connections with the international corporate world lead to practice-based research in cooperation with numerouscompanies and organizations. Thousands of Vlerick graduates are successfully operating at top management levels in manufacturing, services,consultancy, and the public sector in over 100 countries.

About DeloitteDeloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee, and its network of member firms,eachofwhichisalegallyseparateandindependententity.Pleaseseewww.deloitte.com/about detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms.

Deloitte provides audit, tax, consulting, and financial advisory services to public and private clients spanning multiple industries. With a globally connected network of member firms in more than 150 countries, Deloitte brings world-class capabilities and deep local expertise to help clients succeed wherever they operate. Deloitte's approximately 182,000 professionals are committed to becoming the standard of excellence.

This publication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, its member firms, or their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte Network”) is, by means of this publication, rendering professional advice or services. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. No entity in the Deloitte Network shall be responsible for any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

© February 2012 ConsultingDesigned and produced by the Creative Studio at Deloitte, Belgium.

finance transformation in an ict support organisation a...

Documents