The State of Automation for Revenue-Accounting

Nearly half of the accounting professionals surveyed feel that the demands on their team are outpacing their capabilities. This trend is more evident among companies with higher revenues. 

The majority of companies (60%) close their books within 1-5 days, regardless of revenue size. There are some interesting though not unexpected patterns. Smaller companies tend to close faster, with 19% completing in less than a day. And larger companies from $200-$500M+ rarely close in less than a day, and represent the highest proportion of those needing 6-14 days. 

The process is found to be generally manageable, however there are areas that clearly require attention. Systems roles in particular seem to be experiencing the most challenges around monthly close, with 50% saying the process is "A little painful"and 19% saying it's "Very painful." 

The majority of companies across all revenue segments report their Accounting and Finance teams are meeting expectations for month-end close, with an overall average of 71%. The highest satisfaction rate is seen in the $200-500M revenue segment, where 90% of teams are meeting expectations. Approximately 16% of companies report their teams are exceeding expectations. Notably, underperformance is most prevalent in smaller companies, with 18% of $0-10M companies not meeting expectations. 

The trends indicate that a majority of teams are meeting expectations here. A smaller portion of teams are exceeding expectations. There is a notable percentage of teams not meeting expectations, particularly in the $50-200M revenue bracket, where 20% of teams fall short. Additionally, a segment of the data indicates that for some teams, providing executive business insights is not a current objective or expectation, with percentages varying from 5% to 13% across the revenue brackets. 

An average of 55% of all companies report their Accounting and Finance teams are meeting expectations for cross-functional business insights. The $10-50M and $200-500M segments show the highest satisfaction levels at 62%. Interestingly, companies in the $50-200M revenue range show the highest rate of "not meeting expectations" at 29%, significantly above the average of 17%. Smaller companies ($0-10M) have the highest rate of "not applicable" responses at 23%, suggesting that cross-functional insights might be less prioritized in smaller organizations. The rate of "exceeding expectations" remains relatively consistent across segments, ranging from 10-17%, with larger companies showing slightly better performance in this category.

When it comes to revenue reporting by product line, companies in the $200-500M range show the highest rate of exceeding expectations at 41%, significantly above other revenue brackets. Larger companies ($500M+) demonstrate strong performance with 71% meeting expectations and 18% exceeding them. The percentage of teams not meeting expectations is relatively low across all segments, averaging 8%, with the lowest underperformance in the $200-500M segment at just 3%.

The majority of Accounting and Finance organizations (77% overall) are meeting expectations for revenue recognition and reporting. Companies in the $0-10M segment show the highest rate of meeting expectations at 85%. Interestingly, larger companies ($50-200M segment) demonstrate the highest rate of exceeding expectations at 18%, but also show the highest rate of not meeting expectations at 13%. 

A smaller portion of teams are "Exceeding expectations" here, with percentages between 4% and 16%. And a similar percentage of teams are "Not meeting expectations," ranging from 6% to 14%. 

The data reveals several key trends across different revenue brackets. Companies with revenues between $0-10M and $10-50M predominantly meet expectations. As the revenue size increases, the percentage of companies exceeding expectations also rises, particularly noticeable in the $200-500M and $500M+ brackets, where 21% of companies exceed expectations. Conversely, the percentage of companies not meeting expectations is relatively low across all brackets, with the highest being 17% in the $200-500M range. A notable portion of companies, especially in the lower revenue brackets, report that meeting these expectations is not currently an objective, indicating varying strategic priorities based on company size.

Respondents who are "Happy / Very Happy" with the time it takes to complete the rev rec process are relatively consistent across revenue sizes, with percentages ranging from 32% to 41%. The "Neutral" category shows a similar pattern, with percentages between 38% and 47%. However, the "Unhappy / Very Unhappy" category shows a noticeable increase in dissatisfaction with the amount of time it takes as company size increases, peaking at 29% for companies with revenues between $50-200M. Overall, the data suggests that larger companies tend to have a higher percentage of dissatisfaction with the time taken for revenue recognition.

There's a notable disparity in satisfaction levels across different organizational roles. Executives and C-suite members show the highest satisfaction rates at 49%, suggesting they're generally content with the current rev rec process. In contrast, Systems personnel express the most dissatisfaction, with 44% reporting unhappiness and only 13% being satisfied. Middle management positions (Controllers, Directors, Managers, and Specialists) show moderate satisfaction levels. Overall, the organization-wide sentiment leans towards neutral to positive, with 43% neutral and 37% happy, while only 20% express dissatisfaction. This pattern suggests that satisfaction with revenue recognition timing tends to decrease as roles become more hands-on with the technical implementation.

There are notable variations in satisfaction levels across different roles regarding the manual effort required for revenue recognition. Controllers and Directors show the highest dissatisfaction, with 40% being "Unhappy" or "Very unhappy" with the current process. Systems roles also express significant dissatisfaction at 44%. In contrast, Executives (C-suite/VP) and Managers/Specialists report more positive experiences, with 36% and 34% respectively being "Happy" or "Very happy." The neutral response is fairly consistent across roles, ranging from 36% to 50%, with Systems personnel showing the highest neutral stance at 50%. This suggests that middle management and technical teams face the most challenges with the current revenue recognition process, while executive leadership generally has a more positive outlook.

The majority of respondents across all roles are "Happy / Very Happy" here, with the highest satisfaction reported by Executives (62%) and the lowest by Controllers/Directors (44%). Neutral responses are more evenly distributed. Systems roles indicate the most dissatisfaction here, with 31% saying they are "Unhappy" or "Very Unhappy." 

There's a generally positive sentiment here across all organizational roles. The highest satisfaction ("Happy/Very Happy") is seen among Managers/Specialists at 72%, followed closely by Systems personnel at 69% and Executives at 68%. Controllers/Directors show the lowest satisfaction at 60%, but still maintain a majority positive response. Interestingly, Controllers/Directors have the highest neutral stance at 31%, while Systems personnel show the highest dissatisfaction rate at 19%. Overall, only 10% express dissatisfaction.

There's disparity in satisfaction levels across different organizational roles regarding revenue data quality. Executives (42%), Controllers (40%), and Managers (44%) show relatively consistent levels of high satisfaction, but Systems professionals stand out with significantly lower satisfaction. A concerning 50% of Systems professionals are unhappy with the data quality, and only 25% of them report being happy. This indicates a disconnect between management perception and technical reality of data management challenges.

The majority of respondents across different roles are either "Happy" or "Very happy" with the audit-readiness of their revenue data, with the highest satisfaction reported by Executives (62%) and the lowest by Systems pros (38%). Unhappiness is notably higher in Systems at 38%, indicating a potential area for improvement in this group. 

The majority of respondents across all roles describe the process as "Not painless, but very manageable." A significant portion finds the process "A little painful," especially in the Systems role, where 63% of respondents indicated this. Only around 5% to 10% find the process "Very painful," and slightly higher 14% to 17% describe the process as "Painless - fast and easy."

A significant majority of respondents say they trust accounting automation to perform accounting and finance tasks. The highest trust is observed in the $50-200M revenue category at 91%. Conversely, a smaller proportion, between 9% and 22%, do not trust accounting automation, with the highest distrust in the "More than $500M" category at 22%. Overall, the data indicates a general trend of trust in accounting automation, particularly among companies with revenues between $50M and $200M.

Accounting professionals say that automation initiatives are spearheaded from the top-down rather than bottom-up. 44% of smaller companies ($0-10M) say Executives are the drivers of automation initiatives, and that figure gradually decreases to 23% in larger companies ($500M+). Controllers lead automation adoption efforts more among mid-sized companies, peaking at 29% in the $50-200M bracket. Finance team leads appear to take charge approximately 12-19% of the time. Interestingly, a very low 2% of Accounting team leads drive at $10-50M companies, and day-to-day accounting and finance operators consistently have the lowest involvement (5-13%) across all company sizes. 

As revenue increases, there is a tendency towards more automation used for monthly close. The percentage of companies with "Maximum automation" is relatively low across all revenue ranges, with a slight increase in the $50-200M range. "Mostly automated" processes are more prevalent in higher revenue ranges, particularly in the $200-500M category. Conversely, "Somewhat automated" processes are common across all revenue ranges, with the highest percentage in the "$500M+" category. "Minimal" and "None" automation levels are more common in lower revenue ranges.

The data reveals varying levels of automation in the monthly close process across different organizational roles. The trend indicates that a significant portion of the process is somewhat automated, with 45% of the total responses indicating this level. This is particularly pronounced among Controllers/Directors and Systems, where 52% and 63% respectively report somewhat automated processes. In contrast, maximum automation is relatively rare, with only 3% of the total responses indicating full automation, and no Systems reporting this level. Minimal automation is reported by 24% of the total, with a consistent 23-25% across most roles except Systems. Lastly, a small percentage (8%) of the process remains entirely manual, showing a general trend towards increasing automation, albeit with varying degrees of implementation across different roles.

The majority of companies (39%) say their rev rec process is "Somewhat automated," where most of the process is still manual with some automated tasks. The second most common scenario is "Minimal automation" at 27%. Interestingly, larger companies (>$200M revenue) tend to have higher levels of automation, with 24-22% having "Mostly automated" processes compared to only 10-12% for smaller companies ($0-50M). Completely manual processes are more common in smaller companies (22% for $0-10M companies) versus larger ones (8-10% for >$200M companies). Full automation remains relatively rare across all company sizes, ranging from 2-7% of companies.

Automation has a predominantly positive impact across all company revenue segments. The majority of teams (53% overall) report that automation makes them "a lot more efficient," with this sentiment particularly strong in companies with $50-200M revenue (61%). An additional 39% of teams report being "somewhat more efficient" with automation. Very few teams report negative impacts from automation - only 2% overall say it makes them less efficient. Interestingly, smaller companies ($0-10M) report the highest percentage (14%) of teams seeing no efficiency change from automation. This data suggests that automation generally delivers strong positive returns on team efficiency, with the most pronounced benefits observed in mid-market companies.

Most Accounting and Finance organizations report they are "keeping pace" with automation adoption compared to other departments in their company, with approximately 58% of all departments falling into this category. Interestingly, larger companies (those with more than $500M in revenue) show a slightly higher proportion of Accounting leading other departments in automation (19%) compared to smaller companies. Companies in the $200-500M range show the highest percentage (24%) of Accounting departments feeling they are "behind" in automation adoption. There's a notable gap between leaders and laggards, with only 15% of Accounting and Finance departments overall considering themselves as leading in automation adoption within their companies.

Accounting and Finance teams predominantly feel they are keeping pace with their industry peers. A higher percentage of Accounting teams in the $50-200M bracket (20%) feel they are leading the industry in automation adoption. However, in the $200-500M bracket, only 3% feel their teams are leading. Companies with revenues over $500M have a more balanced view, with 17% feeling they are leading. 

Overall, the data reflects a general consensus on the growing importance of automation skills and experience for career progression. In particular, 19% of Systems pros believe automation skills and experience are "Required" for career advancement, and 46% of Controllers (46%) and 43% of Executives (43%) say it's "Very important." 

AR/Invoicing and Reconciliation emerge as the most desired areas for automation, each capturing 17% of total responses. AR/Invoicing is particularly important for larger companies (18% for those over $500M in revenue), while Reconciliation is heavily prioritized by mid-sized companies (20% in the $10-50M range). AP/Expense Tracking follows at 13% overall, with stronger interest from smaller companies. Monthly/Quarterly Reports automation shows an interesting pattern, being most desired by mid-to-large companies (19% in the $200-500M range) but less prioritized by smaller ones. 

There is a clear pattern across different roles when it comes to trusting AI to perform accounting and finance tasks or processes. Executives (C-suite/VP) show the highest confidence, with 71% expressing trust in AI for these tasks. This is followed by Controllers/Directors at 63%. There's a notable drop in trust at lower organizational levels, with Systems personnel showing 56% trust and Manager/Specialists showing the lowest trust at 48%. The overall trust level across all roles stands at 56%, indicating that while there is a slight majority in favor of trusting AI, there remains significant skepticism, particularly among mid-level management positions.

The overwhelming majority of companies (72%) are not using AI to perform their accounting and finance tasks or processes, though there is slightly higher adoption in the mid-range revenue brackets ($50-$500M).