Summary

Properties

• Meeting Date: Unknown
• Meeting Type: Call
• Note Type: Summary
• Attendees: Scott Warner, Michael Carlson, Kylin Stewart, Amity Sendama

1. Meeting Summary

I met with Michael, Kylin, and Amity to review the new budget and forecast file structure and how Finance plans to use it as the working baseline for FC1 and ongoing monthly updates. The file is built off the same template used during budget submission, with summary tabs up front and detailed tabs behind it. The intent is to give department leaders a live working file that shows approved budget, actuals, variance, comments, and eventually forecast updates throughout the year.

For my areas, the main focus is the variable departmental spend section, since headcount and allocations are either system-driven or still affected by the recent organizational realignment. We discussed that current budget-to-actual views are somewhat distorted because the budget was built before the headcount restructuring, so some favorable variances are artificial. For FC1, Finance will likely refresh headcount assumptions and use the working file as the basis for forecast updates from May forward.

We also discussed access controls for the Teams-based budget files. The direction was to separate visibility by department rather than giving all department heads access to all budgets, mainly because smaller departments could expose sensitive headcount details too easily.

On my IT budget specifically, we reviewed a few items that did not look right, especially a training-related amount showing around 60K. I flagged that as likely incorrect and said I would go back through the prior files and Matt's planning assumptions to understand what was originally intended. Kylin also noted there may be a formula issue in the workbook that is affecting the roll-up.

We also aligned on the continued goal of consolidating software subscriptions into IT so we can improve visibility, identify duplicates, and control spend. Finance and AP will help reclassify those as they identify them.

Separately, I showed Amity and the team the legal spend tracking tool I have started building. The purpose is to create a more reliable view of legal invoice detail, matter-level spend, and trends over time so we can budget and manage legal expense based on data rather than rough estimates. It is still early, but it should help us validate SAP spend, understand which functions are driving legal costs, and improve budgeting going forward.

2. Attendee List

• Scott Warner
• Michael Carlson
• Kylin Stewart
• Amity Sendama

3. Action Items

• [Michael Carlson] Finalize and distribute the updated budget/forecast files after incorporating feedback from department reviews.
• [Michael Carlson] Update the CapEx file to reflect approved amounts before distribution, including reducing the AI projects amount by the identified difference between submitted and approved spend.
• [Michael Carlson] Work with HR to review and refresh the personnel/headcount tab so department leaders have a more accurate baseline.
• [Michael Carlson] Confirm how legal/fixed-fee charges to Germany are currently being billed and make sure the agreed cadence is still being followed.
• [Michael Carlson and Kylin Stewart] Review the workbook formulas and roll-ups, especially the training line in IT that appears overstated.
• [Kylin Stewart] Set up the Teams folder structure and likely separate department access so each leader sees only their own budget files.
• [Kylin Stewart] Continue monthly communication cadence with department leaders once the files are live.
• [Kylin Stewart and Michael Carlson] Determine how FC1 forecast inputs will be captured in the file, including whether forecast columns will be added to the detailed tab.
• [Scott Warner] Review prior IT budget submissions and Matt's planning assumptions to determine what no longer belongs in the current budget and to validate questionable line items.
• [Scott Warner] Investigate the IT training amount showing roughly 60K and determine the correct planned spend and timing.
• [Scott Warner] Continue building out the legal spend tracker, including analytics/dashboard capability and eventually tying it back to budget assumptions.
• [Scott Warner] Use the legal spend tool to compare invoice-based legal spending against SAP and improve forecast accuracy.
• [Finance/AP] Continue identifying software subscriptions posted outside IT and reclassify them to IT where appropriate.

4. Relevant Timelines

• Throughout the year - Finance plans for the Teams-based budget file to serve as the live working baseline for updates and forecast submissions.
• Monthly cadence going forward - Kylin will communicate with department leaders and support ongoing updates once the files are released.
• FC1 cycle - Department leaders will use these files as the basis for forecast updates.
• April - Team discussed asking department leaders to update the file for May onward as part of the FC1 process.
• Quarterly - Finance is considering refreshing the personnel/headcount tab on a quarterly basis.
• Before file distribution - Finance needs to correct approved CapEx values and resolve workbook/formula issues.
• Before FC1 submission - I need to validate IT assumptions, especially items inherited from Matt's planning and any budget lines that no longer apply after the org realignment.

5. Additional Notes

• The file structure is familiar, which is helpful. Using the same template as the original budget submission should reduce confusion and make adoption easier.
• The current budget view is directionally useful, but not fully reliable yet because the organizational and headcount changes happened after budget creation.
• Artificial favorable variances need to be handled carefully so department leaders are not making decisions based on distorted comparisons.
• The IT subscription consolidation discussion is important. Centralizing those costs under IT remains the right approach for governance, visibility, and savings identification.
• The legal spend tracker has strategic value beyond just budgeting. If fully developed, it should give us much better visibility into matter-level legal costs, support more disciplined cost allocation, and help identify which functions are driving legal spend.
• There is still some ambiguity around how certain allocations and rebillings are flowing through the system, especially for legal and shared costs. Finance plans to validate how those allocations are pushed to cost centers.
• One unresolved issue is the exact source of the inflated IT training amount. Both I and Finance agreed it needs to be traced before relying on that line for forecast decisions.