Scaling the finance function with business complexity

1. Complexity, not size, should dictate finance design

Two companies at €200m revenue can have radically different finance needs. One is a single-country, single-brand business with a stable product and low leverage. The other is a PE-backed multi-country platform with acquisitions, complex systems and debt.

Real complexity drivers:

• Number of countries, legal entities and regulatory regimes.
• Number of business models (B2B, B2C, SaaS, marketplace, franchise, owned, leased).
• Volume of M&A and integration work.
• Level and structure of leverage and covenants.
• Ownership model: founder-led, family-owned, PE-backed, listed or hybrid.
• Systems landscape: one ERP vs many, data warehouse maturity, EPM vs Excel.

A finance function built only on revenue benchmarks (“we are €X, so we should have Y% of FTE in finance”) ignores these drivers. That is how you end up either underpowered or overbuilt.

2. The core building blocks of a scalable finance function

Regardless of sector, every scalable finance function is built on a small set of core building blocks. Titles and org charts vary, but the underlying work is largely the same.

Six foundational blocks:

• Transactional & accounting backbone
  Record-to-report, purchase-to-pay, order-to-cash, payroll, tax accounting and statutory reporting.
• Business control & FP&A
  Planning, forecasting, performance management, management reporting and scenario analysis.
• Commercial finance
  Pricing, margin analysis, customer and product profitability, promotions and portfolio optimisation.
• Tax & treasury
  Structure, compliance, transfer pricing, funding, cash management, risk and banking relationships.
• Data, systems & reporting
  ERP, EPM, consolidation, BI, data models, data governance and data quality.
• Governance & internal control
  Policies, approval frameworks, risk and control design, audit readiness.

At smaller scales, several of these blocks often sit within the same roles. As complexity increases, each typically becomes a dedicated team. The objective is not to add structure for its own sake, but to consciously decide which blocks are required for the next phase of growth.

Without clear ownership of definitions and data models, systems tend to scale faster than understanding — a dynamic explored further in data governance as a scaling bottleneck.

3. Typical stages of finance maturity

While every company’s journey is unique, there are recognisable patterns in how finance evolves as complexity increases.

Stage 1 – Foundational finance

Profile: Often €10m–€40m revenue, founder-led or family-owned, limited leverage, one or few entities. Finance reality: Strong controller or Head of Finance, small accounting team, external support for tax and specialist topics.

Strengths: Fast, pragmatic, close to the numbers. Risks: Over-reliance on a few individuals; limited forward-looking capability; key-man risk; basic systems.

Stage 2 – Emerging scale

Profile: €40m–€150m revenue, more channels, more countries, external investors, first debt facilities or PE ownership. Finance reality: The organisation starts to need FP&A, better management reporting, stronger controls, and clarity on roles.

Strengths: High energy, willingness to change, growth mindset. Risks: Finance remains transactional; CFO is pulled into detail; no clear business control layer.

Stage 3 – Platform finance

Profile: €150m–€500m+, multi-entity, multi-country, integrations, complex systems, PE-backed or preparing for sale/IPO. Finance reality: A clear finance operating model is now non-negotiable. You need business control, FP&A, a transactional backbone (often SSC), and a data & systems roadmap.

Strengths: Scale, leverage, investor attention, ability to professionalise. Risks: Visibility gaps; slow decision-making; integration debt; lack of alignment between finance, tech and operations.

Stage 4 – Advanced & strategic finance

Profile: High complexity, multiple business models, global footprint, recurring M&A, strong governance (PE or listed). Finance reality: Finance operates as a strategic function: clear sub-teams, robust data foundation, strong operating rhythm, and direct involvement in value creation and strategy.

The goal is not to “arrive” at Stage 4 quickly. The goal is to know where you are and what must change in the next 24 months to avoid being systematically behind complexity.

4. Where scaling efforts usually go wrong

1. Hiring ahead of clarity

Organisations hire senior finance leaders (“Head of FP&A”, “Group Controller”, “Data lead”) before deciding what those roles should actually own. The result is misaligned expectations, duplication and frustration.

2. Copying a corporate template

It is tempting to import a large-company finance structure into a €100m–€200m business. Without the scale and operating rhythm to support it, that structure quickly turns into overhead.

3. Over-centralising too early

Shared service centres and central teams are powerful at the right time — but when processes, data and policies are not standardised first, centralisation simply consolidates chaos.

4. Letting FP&A degrade into reporting

In many organisations, FP&A becomes a reporting factory. No one truly owns performance management, driver-based variance analysis, or the link between plans and actions.

5. Believing tools will fix design problems

Implementing ERP, EPM or BI tools without clear ownership, definitions or an operating rhythm leads to expensive systems with low adoption and limited decision impact.

6. Underestimating the leadership load

CFOs are often expected to scale finance, integrate acquisitions, run transformations, manage lenders and support the CEO — without building a strong leadership bench underneath them.

At this point, the issue is rarely effort. It is capacity — a pattern discussed in more detail in choosing the right CFO capacity model.

5. Designing the finance operating model

Before deciding on hires, shared services or new tools, you need a clear view on how finance will actually work.

Core design questions:

• What must finance own end-to-end (e.g., planning, cash, performance rhythm, policy)?
• Which decisions should finance lead, and which should it support?
• What belongs centrally versus in business units, parks, brands or regions?
• What capabilities are absolutely needed in the next 12–24 months?
• How will finance interact with data/IT, operations and commercial teams?

The answers form a simple operating model: who does what, with which information, on what cadence, to support which decisions.

Centralised vs. hybrid vs. local

Centralised finance can increase consistency and control, but risks becoming detached from operations.

Local finance is close to the business, but can fragment reporting and governance.

Hybrid models often work best:

• Centralised policies, systems, data model and core processes.
• Local or BU-based business control and commercial finance.
• Shared service centre or central team for transactional work.

The right answer depends on your footprint, talent pool and integration history — but it should be chosen, not inherited.

6. A 24-month roadmap for scaling finance

Trying to “fix everything at once” is a recipe for stalled change. A 24-month roadmap with clear stages works better.

Phase 1 – Stabilise & diagnose (0–6 months)

• Ensure basic control over closing, cash, covenants, and core reporting.
• Map the current finance organisation, skills and pain points.
• Assess systems landscape and data quality.
• Clarify the CFO’s role and immediate priorities with the CEO and board.

Phase 2 – Design & prioritise (3–9 months)

• Define the finance operating model for the next 24–36 months.
• Decide which building blocks to strengthen first (e.g., business control, SSC lead, data owner).
• Agree on an operating rhythm aligned with the company’s plan and ownership expectations.
• Translate this into a pragmatic hiring and capability plan.

Phase 3 – Build & embed (6–24 months)

• Recruit key leaders (e.g., Head of Business Control, SSC Manager, Data & Reporting Lead).
• Implement or stabilise critical systems (ERP/EPM/BI) aligned to the data model.
• Shift FP&A from reporting to driver-based forecasting.
• Embed the operating rhythm: monthly performance reviews, quarterly value-creation reviews, weekly cash cadence.

The exact timing may shift, but the sequence matters. Trying to automate before you have clarity on ownership and definitions is wasted effort.

7. A CEO & PE partner checklist

To test whether finance is scaling in line with complexity, ask:

1. Can the CFO clearly articulate the finance operating model for the next 24 months?
2. Do we have one agreed KPI tree and data model across the business?
3. Is there a clear business control/FP&A function that owns performance management?
4. Do we have the right leaders in place beneath the CFO, or is everything still escalated to one person?
5. Are our systems decisions driven by a clear view of data and process, not vendor promises?
6. Is finance a partner in value creation and capital allocation, or primarily a reporting engine?
7. Does our operating rhythm allow finance to challenge, not just present?

If too many answers are “no”, the business is likely more complex than the finance function supporting it.

8. Closing thought

A well-scaled finance function is not necessarily big, centralised or “best practice”. It is fit for purpose: designed around the actual complexity of the business and the expectations of its owners.

When finance is matched to that complexity — with clear ownership, a strong backbone, visible business control and a disciplined operating rhythm — it stops being a constraint and becomes what it should be: the operating partner to the CEO and the board.