CASE STUDY: WHICH DESK SHOULD LOOK AFTER THIS ISSUE? CFO of a European technology company was in aqanday The bocks in thecontrol system and the Treasury system were showing dere numbers. The Treasurer, who had claimed a massive savings as a nesut of his hedges, had resigned when the controller reported that the hedging process over the past to years had actuay lethe fem a lat of money and that the objecives of achieving tablity and vsbility of financials were not being met. The week ater the Treasurer had quit, one of the dealers came to the CFOwth a problemt A hedge transaction Sut the Treasurer had done earlier in the month as part of the hedging programme that had abo been reported in the GL system GERPh had come up for manurity, but the bank had no records of the supposed raaction Smibry, a payment that was serm had shown a confimation, while the bank was still aking for the payent to be The Treasury team was responsible for the transactions and intertace with banks and for accounts and iquidity management. Any entriens to be pansed were done so by the controller's team based on repors issued by Treasry The control team members were not experts on Treasury decsions and products they left dedsiors to the expertse of the Treasury team, agreeing in the spirit of work to help pass the entries in the back end. Implementation of a state ithean Treasury s- tem had assisted the process. Entries were now mosty automated excipt for a Sew processes, where the trone end or dealers sil handed over pors and the trans action entries in the ERP were then be passed by corerol based on these inut eviem, and ater two weels, he received the report Siting through the points, there was one thread that was the elemers, systens, or desks evaluations, numbers, and balances. The reconcil ation process had gone awry- The ERP (GL system) and the state-of-the art Treasury sysem that the company had the Treasury system and whose mark to-markets wee being comectly reflected n the accounting boolks were not present in the banks repors. Lnt eceses by traders had been checked tthe chedkists had been ticind but not eported, since the checks had been done by the traders would come in to the dealers who would perform the verfiation to the best af heir ability and banking reports The CFO called the controller and the senicr members of Treasy team A of them had done their day-to-day aperational jobs to the best of their ablitien but when the time came to dscss Owing to direct system handofs bebween the T one had felt that there was a need for the answers were nop . yarn and the ERP, no mplementation costs Hence the activity had remainedwith the Tremuree and His team. Limit checks were designated a noncritial activity by the dealers and hence were not factored into reviews on automated system reports-where they had (Continued been buit, the reciplent e mail adsresses sted te dealense and pose- migration, the addresses had not been changed. The inbos of the Treasury tam members was thus looded with over 100 repors at kept being fshed Unread repors" folder and purged whenever the malbos exceeded snt The solution again was simple: The reconcilation procen had to be done,rega arly. The question was, by whom? Would it be done by the front office, giving access to te bad nd systas as well? Or was it a back-end tank, reconciling tasks ater thehad been CASE STUDY: WHICH DESK SHOULD LOOK AFTER THIS ISSUE? CFO of a European technology company was in aqanday The bocks in thecontrol system and the Treasury system were showing dere numbers. The Treasurer, who had claimed a massive savings as a nesut of his hedges, had resigned when the controller reported that the hedging process over the past to years had actuay lethe fem a lat of money and that the objecives of achieving tablity and vsbility of financials were not being met. The week ater the Treasurer had quit, one of the dealers came to the CFOwth a problemt A hedge transaction Sut the Treasurer had done earlier in the month as part of the hedging programme that had abo been reported in the GL system GERPh had come up for manurity, but the bank had no records of the supposed raaction Smibry, a payment that was serm had shown a confimation, while the bank was still aking for the payent to be The Treasury team was responsible for the transactions and intertace with banks and for accounts and iquidity management. Any entriens to be pansed were done so by the controller's team based on repors issued by Treasry The control team members were not experts on Treasury decsions and products they left dedsiors to the expertse of the Treasury team, agreeing in the spirit of work to help pass the entries in the back end. Implementation of a state ithean Treasury s- tem had assisted the process. Entries were now mosty automated excipt for a Sew processes, where the trone end or dealers sil handed over pors and the trans action entries in the ERP were then be passed by corerol based on these inut eviem, and ater two weels, he received the report Siting through the points, there was one thread that was the elemers, systens, or desks evaluations, numbers, and balances. The reconcil ation process had gone awry- The ERP (GL system) and the state-of-the art Treasury sysem that the company had the Treasury system and whose mark to-markets wee being comectly reflected n the accounting boolks were not present in the banks repors. Lnt eceses by traders had been checked tthe chedkists had been ticind but not eported, since the checks had been done by the traders would come in to the dealers who would perform the verfiation to the best af heir ability and banking reports The CFO called the controller and the senicr members of Treasy team A of them had done their day-to-day aperational jobs to the best of their ablitien but when the time came to dscss Owing to direct system handofs bebween the T one had felt that there was a need for the answers were nop . yarn and the ERP, no mplementation costs Hence the activity had remainedwith the Tremuree and His team. Limit checks were designated a noncritial activity by the dealers and hence were not factored into reviews on automated system reports-where they had (Continued been buit, the reciplent e mail adsresses sted te dealense and pose- migration, the addresses had not been changed. The inbos of the Treasury tam members was thus looded with over 100 repors at kept being fshed Unread repors" folder and purged whenever the malbos exceeded snt The solution again was simple: The reconcilation procen had to be done,rega arly. The question was, by whom? Would it be done by the front office, giving access to te bad nd systas as well? Or was it a back-end tank, reconciling tasks ater thehad been