How to Verify the Reliability of a Finance Process Automation Partner

The decision to automate financial processes has been made. Now comes the next, equally important choice: how to choose a finance automation partner. This is about more than just software or features. It is about trusting the figures at the end of a process. A partner must not only deliver a solution today but also ensure its reliability for the future. The biggest challenge here is constant software updates, which can render a functioning automation useless from one day to the next.

The Challenge: Constant Software Updates

Software is constantly evolving. Programmes that are central to daily financial operations, in particular, regularly receive new features and user interface changes. Microsoft is a good example of this. The company introduces new features for its products, such as Microsoft 365 Copilot, using a staggered model (Microsoft 2026). These updates are gradually rolled out to different user groups.

What is often an advantage for users poses a significant risk for automated processes. An automation that relies on the exact position of a menu item or the structure of an exported file can fail due to such an update. The chain from the ERP export, through processing in Excel, to the final report is fragile. If one link in this chain breaks, the end result is, at best, unavailable. At worst, it is incorrect without anyone noticing.

This risk does not affect the large, stable ERP systems themselves. It affects the Excel layer that many finance teams have built around their ERP. This is precisely where most automations come in. The reliability of automated reports therefore depends directly on how well the automation can handle these inevitable changes.

More Than Just Features: The Partner's Methodology

Many providers of automation solutions focus on the performance of their software in their presentations. They show impressive dashboards and promise rapid implementation. These aspects are not unimportant. However, they do not answer the crucial question of long-term reliability.

The real difference between a good and a risky partner lies in their methodology. A methodology is the sum of the principles, processes, and tools that a partner uses to design, build, test, and maintain an automation. It is the strategic answer to the challenge of constant software updates.

A solid methodology does not aim to prevent software changes. That is impossible. Instead, it aims to design automations to be resilient to changes. It ensures that errors can be quickly identified and rectified, and that the correctness of the data remains verifiable at all times. The choice of partner is therefore a choice of their way of working.

What Constitutes a Robust Methodology

A robust methodology is based on the principles of traceability, validation, and maintainability. Every step of the automation must be transparent and understandable. There must be no 'black boxes' where calculations take place that no one can trace.

The importance of a rigorous approach for the accuracy of calculations has also been proven in other areas. A study on fraud detection in financial reports showed how crucial the choice and correct application of algorithms are for predictive accuracy (doi.org 2024a). Although this concerns fraud detection and not process automation, the principle is transferable: the quality of the result depends on the quality of the method.

A partner with a strong methodology will follow a clear, multi-stage process.

Analysis: First, the existing manual process is fully understood and documented. Every click, every formula, and every manual adjustment in the chain from the ERP to the report is recorded.

Design: The automation is built in a modular way. Instead of a single, monolithic script, individual, testable components are created. This facilitates troubleshooting and adaptation for future software updates. The logic remains traceable.

Validation: This is the most critical step. The results of the automated process are systematically compared with the results of the proven manual process. The partner must be able to prove that their automation delivers exactly the same, correct figures under all tested conditions.

Maintenance: There must be a defined process for handling errors. What happens if a Microsoft update breaks the automation? Who is responsible, how quickly is the response, and how is it ensured that the corrected version is validated again?

Questions to Ask a Potential Partner

To assess a potential partner's methodology, you need to ask the right questions. Go beyond the usual questions about costs and timelines. Focus on the processes that ensure reliability. The answers to these questions are often more revealing than any product demonstration.

Here are some key questions for your discussion:

• How do you ensure that the automation still delivers correct figures after an Excel update?
• How do you document the automated process so that our internal auditors or we ourselves can trace it?
• What is your exact process for validating the results of the automation before it goes live?
• Can you show us an example of a validation report?
• What happens if an automation fails due to a software update? What does your support process look like?
• Which parts of a process do you typically automate, and which do you deliberately leave manual, and why?

A reliable partner will welcome these questions. They will be able to provide clear and detailed answers based on established processes. A partner who evades these questions or remains vague may not have a robust methodology. This poses a direct risk to the quality of your financial data.

The Quality of Accounting Information as the Goal

The overarching goal of any automation in finance is to improve the quality of accounting information. Studies confirm that digital transformation can have this effect. It increases transparency and improves information quality (doi.org 2024a). However, this positive effect is not a given.

A faulty automation reverses this benefit. It can systematically produce incorrect figures and undermine confidence in the entire financial reporting process. The automation partner's methodology is the decisive factor that ensures digital transformation truly unfolds its positive effects.

Furthermore, the demands on financial reporting are constantly increasing. Topics such as ESG reporting are gaining importance and prevalence, as a global analysis shows (doi.org 2027). This increases the complexity and pressure on finance teams. Reliable automation becomes a strategic advantage here. It creates the necessary freedom to devote attention to these new, demanding topics.

What You Can Do This Month

The best way to scrutinise a potential partner's methodology is with a concrete example. Start with internal preparation even before you have the first conversation.

Select one of your recurring, manual reporting processes. Document every single step, from the data export from your ERP system to the final key figure in the management report. Note where data is copied, formulas are adjusted, or manual corrections are made.

In this documentation, identify the most critical points. Where are errors most likely to occur? Which steps are most dependent on the exact structure of an Excel file?

Use this detailed process description as a basis for your discussions. When you evaluate an automation partner for your financial processes, ask them to apply their methodology to this specific case. Ask how they would address the risk points you have identified. This will make the conversation concrete and give you a deep insight into the partner's actual working methods and reliability.

Microsoft, Excel, Microsoft 365 and Copilot are trademarks of the Microsoft group of companies.