Part of the Benchmarking the finance function series.
Most finance functions know they could be better, but can't say how better, or what "good" even looks like. A maturity model fixes that: it turns a vague sense of "our close is painful" into a level on a ladder, a target, and a route between the two.
A finance maturity model describes how a finance process is run today on a simple scale - typically five levels, from manual spreadsheets to a touchless, continuous process. You score each area (close, consolidation, reporting, budgeting, forecasting, statutory) independently, because almost no finance function is uniformly mature: a slick monthly close can sit right next to a budget cycle still run in fifty linked workbooks.
If you came here to run that scoring rather than read about it, the free two-minute finance function assessment scores each area against the levels below - no login, and you keep the result.
The five levels
The ladder below is the one our toolkit uses. The labels matter less than the behaviour each describes - score yourself by what actually happens, not by the software you own.
| Level | Name | What it looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Manual / Excel | Performed in spreadsheets; no live link to the source system. Re-keying, version confusion, key-person risk. |
| 2 | Templated | Standard templates and a repeatable process, but still largely manual hand-offs and manual reconciliation. |
| 3 | System-supported | Performed in a platform on live data. One version of the truth; effort shifts from gathering to checking. |
| 4 | Automated & controlled | Largely automated, with controls, audit trail and drill-back. Exceptions are managed, not everything. |
| 5 | Optimised | Touchless / continuous. The process runs itself; people's effort moves to analysis and decisions. |
A finance operations maturity model, process by process
The five levels only become useful when they are applied to each finance process on its own. This is what the rungs look like in practice for the seven processes the Finance Value Score assesses.
| Process | Level 1 - manual | Level 3 - system-supported | Level 5 - optimised |
|---|---|---|---|
| Month-end close | Checklist in a spreadsheet, journals keyed, close finishes when the last person is done | Close calendar and task workflow in a platform, status visible, sub-ledgers reconciled on a schedule | Continuous close: reconciliations run daily, exceptions worked, period closes in under five days |
| Consolidation | Trial balances emailed and consolidated in a workbook; intercompany matched by hand | Consolidation engine with ownership rules, eliminations posted automatically, drill to entity | Touchless consolidation from source ledgers, intercompany resolved at the entity, full audit trail to transaction |
| Management reporting | Pack copied from Excel into Word or PowerPoint, commentary written from scratch each month | Standard report set on live data with drill-down; commentary captured against the number | Self-serve reporting, narrative generated and reviewed, board pack produced from the system |
| Budgeting | Templates emailed out and consolidated by hand, many iterations, version confusion | Budget collected in a planning tool with workflow, one version, variance to actual automatic | Driver-based budget built from operational plans, scenarios in minutes, few iterations |
| Forecasting | Forecast is a re-keyed budget; updated a few times a year | Rolling forecast on a defined cadence, actuals flow in, variance explained | Continuous, driver-based, with predictive assistance and scenario comparison |
| Statutory reporting | Year-end packs built in spreadsheets from the management numbers, disclosures typed | Statutory hierarchy and disclosures held in the consolidation system, tagged once | Statutory and management views from one dataset, filings produced and reviewed, no re-keying |
| ESG reporting | Data requested by email, held in spreadsheets, assured by hand | ESG data collected with the same workflow and controls as financial data | ESG metrics reported alongside financials from one governed dataset, audit-ready |
Put numbers beside the rungs and the ladder becomes a benchmark: the finance function benchmarks page shows what top-quartile, median and bottom look like for days to close, cost of finance and finance team size, so a level-2 close can be read as "ten days and a team a third bigger than it needs to be".
How to assess finance maturity
Score each process by the behaviour that actually happens, using the lowest level that is true for the whole cycle rather than the best week you have had. Do it with the people who run the process, in one sitting, and record the evidence for the level given - the template you still email, the reconciliation still done in a workbook. The result is a profile across seven processes, and it is the profile that tells you where to start: the lowest-scoring process that carries the most effort, which is normally the close or the consolidation.
Why score each process separately
Treating "finance" as one number hides the very thing you need to act on. The whole point of scoring close, consolidation, reporting, planning, forecasting and statutory reporting on their own is to find the one or two areas dragging the rest down - and to avoid spending on tooling for a process that's already at level 4.
The trap: automating chaos
The single most expensive mistake in finance transformation is buying automation for a level-1 or level-2 process. Software automates a defined process; bolt it onto an inconsistent one and you simply industrialise the mess - faster, at scale, and now with a licence fee attached. A maturity model is, above all, a way to see which processes are ready for tooling and which need their foundations fixed first - standard calendar, clear ownership, reconciliations under control - before a penny is spent.
From score to plan
A level on its own is a diagnosis, not a cure. The useful output is the gap: where you are, where you want to be, and the ordered set of moves to climb each rung - quick wins first, foundational fixes before tooling. That's the difference between a maturity assessment that sits in a drawer and one that drives a budget.
Climbing the ladder also has a number attached to it. Each rung removes a chunk of manual effort, rework and risk; put a cost on that effort today and you have the hard-£ case for the investment - which is exactly what a board wants to see next to the word "transformation".
Common questions
What is a finance maturity model?
A finance maturity model is a scale - usually five levels - that describes how a finance process is run, from manual spreadsheets at level 1 to a touchless, continuous process at level 5. You score each area (close, consolidation, reporting, budgeting, forecasting, statutory) separately to find which processes are holding the function back.
What are the five levels of finance maturity?
Level 1 Manual/Excel, Level 2 Templated, Level 3 System-supported, Level 4 Automated & controlled, and Level 5 Optimised (touchless/continuous). Score by what actually happens in the process, not by the software you own.
What is a finance operations maturity model?
The same five-level ladder applied to each operational finance process - close, consolidation, reporting, budgeting, forecasting, statutory and ESG reporting - with a description of what each level looks like in that process, so the score can be evidenced rather than guessed.
How do you assess finance function maturity?
Score each process separately, by the behaviour that happens every cycle, at the lowest level that is true for the whole cycle, with the people who run it and the evidence noted. The free two-minute Snapshot does this across all seven areas and turns the gap into a costed case.
Why score each finance process separately?
Because almost no finance function is uniformly mature - a slick close can sit next to a budget cycle still run in spreadsheets. Scoring each process separately finds the one or two areas dragging the rest down and stops you buying tooling for a process that's already mature.