The Total Economic Impact™ Of Thomson Reuters Confirmation
Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By Confirmation
A Forrester Total Economic Impact™ Study Commissioned By Thomson Reuters, July 2024
Thomson Reuters Confirmation is an easy-to-use platform that streamlines and simplifies the confirmation process, saving employee time and reducing audit timelines. With Confirmation, the end-to-end process is managed in one centralized location to deliver trusted and high-quality confirmations. In addition to efficiently delivering secure confirmations, the platform is simple to adopt and scale as needed to fully meet an audit firm’s confirmation needs.
Return on investment (ROI)
68%
Net present value (NPV)
$101K
Thomson Reuters commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying Confirmation.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of Confirmation on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed five representatives of four organizations with experience using Confirmation . For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the interviewees’ experiences and combined the results into a single composite organization that completes 1,500 confirmations with Confirmation per year.
Interviewees said that prior to using Confirmation, their organizations did not have a dedicated solution for confirmations and they instead utilized manual methods. This approach relied primarily on email, but it could also include fax, phone, and mail. However, this course lacked consistency and demanded significant employee time. These limitations led to inefficiencies and a desire for a more streamlined, centralized, and digital way forward.
After the investment in Confirmation, interviewees’ organizations achieved a more efficient and accurate confirmation process with faster timelines. Key results from the investment include employee time saved, faster onboarding, and cost savings with trusted and high-quality confirmations.
Key Findings
Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
- Fifty percent time savings on standard confirmations. By using Confirmation for its bank confirmation needs, the composite organization saves employee time, reduces timelines, and has a more seamless confirmation process overall. Confirmation provides a centralized and easy-to-use platform with a direct link to the banks, which helps coordinate workflows and makes preparing, sending, and receiving confirmations more efficient. This benefit equals $43,000 over three years for the composite organization.
- Eighty percent time saved on more complex confirmations. In addition to using Confirmation for its typical banking confirmations, the composite organization also uses the platform for more complex ones that previously required extensive follow-up, as well as some accounts receivable (AR) confirmations that are innately more time-intensive on average. By having direct connections to the relevant parties and immediately reaching the correct people in a unified platform, Confirmation saves the composite considerable employee time that results in financial savings of $69,000 over three years.
- Faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process. In addition to saving time at the composite as employees work on confirmation requests throughout the year, Confirmation also allows the organization’s new users to more quickly learn the confirmation process. Its new users only need to learn Confirmation instead of learning different procedures for different banks. This saves each new user at the composite organization an average of 2 hours and amounts to savings of $4,000 over three years.
-
Cost savings with routinized fee
collection. Since the pricing for Confirmation is
straightforward and tied to specific confirmations, the composite
organization is able to pass these costs onto the applicable clients. Prior
to using Confirmation, when the composite completed confirmations through
manual methods and additional employee time, costs were instead absorbed by
the composite organization. Recouping costs when using Confirmation equals
$135,000 over three years for the composite organization.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
- Faster timeline to complete confirmations and audits. With Confirmation, the composite organization’s confirmations are completed 65% faster on average. This keeps audit timelines on track and helps the composite meet its deadlines.
- Improved client experience. Confirmation results in an easier, more digitized process that reduces the need for the composite organization’s clients to get involved in facilitating confirmations. Clients can simply sign on to the platform to approve requests.
- Trusted and high-quality confirmations. The banks with which the composite organization completes confirmations widely use Confirmation. The added automation and direct link to the banks reduces errors, avoids duplication, and improves overall accuracy.
- Improved employee experience. Confirmation improves the employee experience at the composite organization by providing a modern, user-friendly tool that improves efficiency. Additionally, the platform can be used from anywhere and enables hybrid work.
- More time for higher-value work. With the time savings that results from using Confirmation, employees at the composite organization have more time to spend on higher-level advisory and analytical work.
- API flexibility. While the composite organization does not currently use an API with its Confirmation adoption, the availability provides long-term flexibility should the organization prefer to use a more fully integrated approach in the future.
Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:
- Costs to Thomson Reuters and for internal efforts. The composite organization pays Thomson Reuters on a per-confirmation basis. Additionally, an internal FTE spends 5 hours dedicated to the initial adoption of Confirmation. These costs total $149,000 over three years for the composite organization.
The representative interviews and financial analysis found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $251,000 over three years versus costs of $149,000, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $101,000 and an ROI of 68%.
Key Statistics
-
Return on investment (ROI)
68%
-
Benefits PV
$251K
-
Net present value (NPV)
$101K
-
Payback
<6 months
Benefits (Three-Year)
Time saved on standard confirmations Time saved on more complex confirmations Faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process Cost savings with routinized fee collectionTEI Framework And Methodology
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment Confirmation.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Confirmation can have on an organization.
-
Due Diligence
Interviewed Thomson Reuters stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to Confirmation.
-
Interviews
Interviewed five representatives at organizations using Confirmation to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
-
Composite Organization
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.
-
Financial Model Framework
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.
-
Case Study
Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.
Disclosures
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by Thomson Reuters and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.
Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in Confirmation.
Thomson Reuters reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.
Thomson Reuters provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Consulting Team:
Matthew Carr
Drivers leading to the Confirmation investment
Interviews
| Role | Industry | Region | Employees |
|---|---|---|---|
| Director of assurance | Auditing | North America | 350 |
| Audit director | Auditing | APAC | 150 |
| Partner | Auditing | EMEA | 30 |
| Assurance director | Auditing | EMEA | 10,000 |
| Assurance manager | Auditing | EMEA | 10,000 |
Key Challenges
Before deploying Confirmation, interviewees’ organizations lacked a dedicated confirmation solution. Instead, they relied on manual processes that primarily used email, but also fax, phone, and mail at times. The interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
- Time-consuming processes. Interviewees said that the time employees needed to spend on bank confirmations was a top pain point. Setting up and managing confirmations were time sinks when working with manual approaches that lacked clear and direct links to the banks. The partner at an audit firm said, “It was a very manual process and fairly time-consuming.”
- Lack of standardization. Many interviewees shared that there was no central visibility over the confirmation processes at their organizations. Individual confirmations were managed by different team members and often in different ways. Similarly, when issues arose, they were dealt with in an ad hoc manner. The assurance director at an audit firm said: “The lack of standardization was the biggest pain point. … The more digital a product and a service is, the better the value creation.”
- A desire to digitize processes. Interviewees considered any possible changes to their confirmation approach in light of their firms’ broader strategies to move toward more digital and modern ways of working. The partner at an audit firm explained that moving to Confirmation delivered on that need, saying: “It just felt like a no-brainer to move to something more digital, manageable, and centralized.”
- Compliance with bank protocol. Interviewees said that the banks their organizations verified with were moving toward a more digital approach, with some beginning to reject traditional confirmation procedures. They noted that Confirmation met the banks’ criteria and is widely accepted.
Composite Organization
Based on the interviews, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite company, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the five interviewees, and it is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:
Description of composite. The composite organization is an audit firm with $150 million in annual revenue and 750 employees. Before implementing Confirmation, the composite organization used manual methods for its confirmation needs. It relied predominantly on email, but it also occasionally utilized fax, phone, and mail during the confirmation process.
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization replaces its legacy approach with Confirmation. It uses the platform for 1,500 confirmations a year, which is a large number of its total confirmations. It uses the platform primarily for bank confirmations, but also for a smaller number of accounts receivable confirmations with the potential to expand to accounts payable, legal, employee benefit plan, and private equity confirmations, which the platform also supports.
Quantified benefit data as applied to the composite
Total Benefits
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Time saved on standard confirmations | $17,260 | $17,260 | $17,260 | $51,781 | $42,924 |
| Btr | Time saved on more complex confirmations | $27,702 | $27,702 | $27,702 | $83,106 | $68,891 |
| Ctr | Faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process | $1,625 | $1,625 | $1,625 | $4,874 | $4,040 |
| Dtr | Cost savings with routinized fee collection | $54,150 | $54,150 | $54,150 | $162,450 | $134,663 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $100,737 | $100,737 | $100,737 | $302,210 | $250,518 | |
Time Saved On Standard Confirmations
Evidence and data. The most common use case for Confirmation at interviewees’ organizations was using the platform for standard bank confirmations in order to save employee time, reduce timelines, and have a more seamless confirmation process overall. Interviewees said Confirmation provided a centralized and easy-to-use platform with a direct link to the banks, which helped their organizations coordinate efficient workflows and made preparing, sending, and receiving confirmations more efficient. On average at interviewees’ organizations, standard banking confirmations required 50% less employee effort with Confirmation.
- Most interviewees said that typical banking confirmations required around 30 minutes of employee effort when they used their legacy tools and approaches. After adopting Confirmation, that time commitment fell to around 15 minutes or less. The director of assurance said: “Confirmation certainly cuts down on the time that we spend on confirmations. ... It cuts down the time by at least half.”
- Interviewees said Confirmation serving as a centralized platform for confirmation requests was a significant aspect of the value proposition. They explained that this centralization provided structure and increased employee efficiency. The audit director noted: “It’s good to have confirmations all in one place. That just makes the process smoother. They’re not getting lost, and there are no questions about locating emails.”
- The partner at an audit firm similarly explained that by centralizing the process, Confirmation saved significant time related to following up: “Probably the biggest time savings [with Confirmation] is in the follow-up process because it’s all in one place. There’s no risk of it getting lost.”
- Interviewees also noted that Confirmation could help improve and construct workflows as requests from their auditors, authorizations from their clients, and verifications from the banks were all managed on the platform.
- The assurance director stated: “Confirmation provides us with the feature of client authorization being managed on the platform. Plus, Confirmation has the contact with the banks; we don’t have to verify the banks’ authenticity. These are two very important steps, and Confirmation make our process easier.”
- Interviewees noted other features that made Confirmation a smarter way to work. For example, signing on to the platform allowed users to easily track confirmations by seeing when requests were entered, any follow-ups, and the status. This all made it less likely that they would need to get the client involved or reach out to the bank, both of which would take additional time.
- Having client information saved year-over-year in Confirmation was also a time-saver. The partner at an audit firm said: “In the manual process we used before, you would start from a fresh template and input all the data again. In Confirmation, if you’re requesting a bank confirmation for the same account, you pretty much just have to put in the new date and press go. That will get the necessary authorizations and the request out. So, in Year 2, it’s already there and can take 30 seconds. It’s a good feature and another [source of] time savings.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite completes 1,275 standard banking confirmations each year. Prior to the adoption of Confirmation, these confirmations required 30 minutes of employee time on average.
- With Confirmation, these confirmations require 50% less employee time.
- The average fully burdened hourly salary of an employee working on confirmations is $57.
Risks. The benefit of time saved on standard confirmations will vary based on:
- The number and type of confirmations.
- The tools and processes in place prior to Confirmation and the amount of employee effort they required.
- The average fully burdened salaries of employees.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $43,000.
Time Saved On Standard Confirmations
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Standard confirmations | Composite | 1,275 | 1,275 | 1,275 |
| A2 | Time per confirmation (hours) | Composite | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| A3 | Percent of time saved with Confirmation | Interviews | 50% | 50% | 50% |
| A4 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for an employee conducting confirmations | TEI standard | $57 | $57 | $57 |
| At | Time saved on standard confirmations | A1*A2*A3*A4 | $18,169 | $18,169 | $18,169 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | ||||
| Atr | Time saved on standard confirmations (risk-adjusted) | $17,260 | $17,260 | $17,260 | |
| Three-year total: $51,781 | Three-year present value: $42,924 | ||||
Time Saved On More Complex Confirmations
Evidence and data. Multiple interviewees explained that, in addition to their typical banking confirmations, their organizations also used Confirmation for more complex ones that previously required extensive follow-up as well as accounts receivable confirmations that were inherently more time-intensive on average. Interviewees said Confirmation delivered considerable time saving when completing these more complex confirmations for the same reasons that it did for standard confirmations (e.g., providing a more seamless digitized process with direct connections to the relevant parties). Among the interviewees that quantified this benefit for their organizations, the time savings averaged 80%.
- The partner at an audit firm explained: “Where we had real issues [before using Confirmation] is when things went wrong: not requesting authority from the bank in the right way, needing to draft a separate letter to request authority, and having to go back and do things again. People would chase, waste time calling banks, [and get other] staff involved. So, there are big savings [with Confirmation] for when the process didn’t work effectively.”
- While interviewees said their organizations primarily used Confirmation for banking confirmations, some noted the platform supported other types, such as those for accounts receivable. Without Confirmation, these would sometimes entail particularly time-consuming manual procedures, such as going through subsequent payments or examining shipping documents to ensure validity.
- The director of assurance shared an experience using Confirmation for accounts receivable confirmations: “You can cut out a significant amount of time by getting [accounts receivable] confirmations back as it can cut down on the alternative procedures you have to perform. If you get a confirmation back [from Confirmation,] all you have to do is tie it to the AR, and you’re done.”
- The number of these more complex confirmations varied at interviewees’ organizations from a small number to more than 30% of the total, and they often took a few hours to complete prior to the adoption of Confirmation. The partner at an audit firm explained that especially for these more complex use cases, “Confirmation became a no-brainer.”
- Interviewees emphasized the value of having a direct link to the banks with Confirmation and reaching the correct person the first time. The partner said: “At certain banks, particularly in more recent years, it was impossible to understand where the audit team resided, if they even had one, and what address to send the confirmation to. Getting it to the right place could be very difficult.”
- Confirmation also allowed employees at interviewees’ organizations to easily collaborate as needed. Interviewees said the platform’s functionality allowed multiple employees to access the same confirmation request, whether to leverage additional expertise or to complete the work while colleagues were on vacation.
- Interviewees noted that in addition to bank and accounts receivable confirmations, Confirmation also supported accounts payable, legal, employee benefit plan, and private equity confirmations. While their organizations are not yet utilizing the platform for these additional use cases, some interviewees noted the availability offers flexibility should their needs evolve.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite completes 225 more complex confirmations (e.g., accounts receivable confirmations or banking confirmations where the process does not go smoothly) each year. Prior to the adoption of Confirmation, these confirmations required 3 hours of employee time on average.
- With Confirmation, these confirmations require 80% less employee time.
- The average fully burdened hourly salary for an employee who works on confirmations is $57.
Risks. The benefit of time saved on more complex confirmations will vary based on:
- The number and type of confirmations, particularly the number that have added complexity that require extensive employee time.
- The tools and processes in place prior to Confirmation and the amount of employee effort they required.
- The average fully burdened salaries of employees.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $69,000.
Time Saved On More Complex Confirmations
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | More complex confirmations | Composite | 225 | 225 | 225 |
| B2 | Time per confirmation (hours) | Composite | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| B3 | Percent of time saved with Confirmation | Interviews | 80% | 80% | 80% |
| B4 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for an employee conducting confirmations | TEI standard | $57 | $57 | $57 |
| Bt | Time saved on more-complex confirmations | B1*B2*B3*B4 | $30,780 | $30,780 | $30,780 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||
| Btr | Time saved on more complex confirmations (risk-adjusted) | $27,702 | $27,702 | $27,702 | |
| Three-year total: $83,106 | Three-year present value: $68,891 | ||||
Faster Onboarding And Understanding Of The Confirmation Process
Evidence and data. Interviewees noted that in addition to saving employees’ time as they worked on confirmation requests throughout the year, Confirmation allowed new users to more quickly learn the confirmation process at their organizations. Dealing directly with the banks meant employees needed to learn different procedures for different banks. But when using Confirmation, they only needed to know how to use the platform. Interviewees said Confirmation was simple to use and, according to those interviewees who could quantify the benefit, it led to an average time savings of 2 hours for new users.
- Interviewees noted that when working directly with banks to request confirmations, the procedures across the different banks varied somewhat. While not onerous to learn, it was a time commitment that was largely eliminated with Confirmation.
- The director of assurance explained: “Each bank might want something a little bit different in how you have to fill out the confirmation for them. Now, [with Confirmation,] everything’s the same.”
- More broadly, interviewees repeatedly stressed that Confirmation is very easy to learn and use.
- Some interviewees’ organizations saved additional time by designating only a small subset of employees to work on confirmations after the adoption of Confirmation. This reduced the number of employees who needed to learn confirmation protocol altogether, and it was feasible because Confirmation served as a centralized and easy-to-use platform.
- The partner at the audit firm explained: “Instead of multiple members of the audit team having to get involved with the bank process, be trained, and understand the nuances of different banks, we’ve moved to only one person really needing to understand the Confirmation platform. That’s pretty much the only training requirement we need now.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- Fifteen new or current employees learn the confirmation process each year.
- With the adoption of Confirmation, it takes these employees less time to learn the confirmation process. On average, each saves 2 hours.
- The average fully burdened hourly salary for an employee who learns confirmation is $57.
Risks. The benefit of faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process will vary based on:
- The complexity of bank processes that employees needed to learn prior to using Confirmation.
- The average fully burdened salaries of employees.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $4,000.
Faster Onboarding And Understanding Of The Confirmation Process
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | New or current employees learning the confirmation process | Composite | 15 | 15 | 15 |
| C2 | Time saved with onboarding (hours) | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| C3 | Average fully burdened hourly salary for an employee conducting confirmations | TEI standard | $57 | $57 | $57 |
| Ct | Faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process | C1*C2*C3 | $1,710 | $1,710 | $1,710 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | ||||
| Ctr | Faster onboarding and understanding of the confirmation process (risk-adjusted) | $1,625 | $1,625 | $1,625 | |
| Three-year total: $4,874 | Three-year present value: $4,040 | ||||
Cost Savings With Routinized Fee Collection
Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations collected fees from their clients according to the number of confirmations completed for them on Confirmation. Interviewees explained that the platform has a straightforward payment structure that charges per confirmation and is easy to bill to clients. This is unlike before using Confirmation, when the primary cost was additional employee time that was not charged for the most part.
- With Confirmation, there was a clear way to pass on the associated costs. The director of assurance said: “We charge our clients for the Confirmation costs. We’re getting that back. Any direct fees from Confirmation are just passed on to our client.”
- The partner added: “We make sure that [the cost of Confirmation] gets picked up in client billing. It’s recovered within our pricing.”
- Previously, when the primary cost was employee time, interviewees’ firms usually just absorbed it as a cost of doing business. The move to Confirmation led these organizations to alter their approaches given that the flat rate with Confirmation was easy to retrieve from their clients.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- Each year, the composite completes 1,500 confirmations with Confirmation.
- The composite charges its clients $38 per confirmation.
Risks. The benefit of cost savings with routinized fee collection will vary based on the approach used to charge clients for confirmations.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $135,000.
Cost Savings With Routinized Fee Collection
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Confirmations | Composite | 1,500 | 1,500 | 1,500 | |
| D2 | Cost collected from client per confirmation | Interviews | $38 | $38 | $38 | |
| Dt | Cost savings with routinized fee collection | D1*D2 | $57,000 | $57,000 | $57,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | |||||
| Dtr | Cost savings with routinized fee collection (risk-adjusted) | $54,150 | $54,150 | $54,150 | ||
| Three-year total: $162,450 | Three-year present value: $134,663 | |||||
Unquantified Benefits
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
- Faster timeline to complete confirmations and audits. Interviewees noted that with Confirmation, their organizations’ confirmations and audits were completed more quickly. One interviewee who could quantify this metric said their organization completed confirmations 65% faster on average with Confirmation. The assurance director noted the importance of this added speed: “The faster [it is], the better. The reporting deadlines are getting shorter every year. Speed is very important. The world is moving to real-time audit.”
- Improved client experience. Interviewees said that Confirmation led to an easier, more digitized process that reduced any client involvement, such as communicating through paper or multiple emails or helping reach the banks. The director of assurance said: “For the client, it’s as easy as signing into confirmation.com and clicking that they approve. Anything we can do to make it easier for the client is helpful to us.”
-
Trusted and high-quality confirmations.
Interviewees across regions reported that Confirmation is
widely used by banks and that the platform provides trusted and high-quality
confirmations. Moreover, Confirmation added automation and digitization to
the process, making it less prone to error.
The assurance manager elaborated: “The real value [of Confirmation] resides in the accuracy of the information, the interaction with the stakeholders that is facilitated through the platform, and [Confirmation’s] relationship with the banks, which guarantees a reply. We are avoiding mistakes. We are avoiding any duplication.”
-
Improved employee experience. Interviewees reported that Confirmation supported an improved
employee experience by providing a user-friendly tool that drove efficiency.
The director of assurance summarized by saying, “Confirmation makes [my
organization’s employees’] lives easier.”
Additionally, the director of assurance described the value of being able to use Confirmation from anywhere: “It’s a lot easier to do confirmations [with Confirmation,] especially with a hybrid workforce. At the office, at a client, or at home, you can use Confirmation from anywhere.” - More time for higher-value work. With the productivity gains from Confirmation, employees had more time for higher-value advisory and analytical work. Additionally, some interviewees’ organizations leveraged the centralization that Confirmation provided to have only a small subset of employees dedicated to confirmations. This reduced the number of people involved and allowed more admin staff to execute confirmation work.
- API flexibility. One interviewee said their organization implemented Confirmation through an API, and they reported the solution was well-integrated and that Confirmation data synchronized with their systems. This approach delivered added efficiency and flexibility. Other interviewees noted that while their organization does not currently use an API, it’s a perk to have different delivery options as their needs evolve.
Flexibility
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Confirmation and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
- Supporting long-term digitization efforts. Interviewees noted that Confirmation supports their organizations’ larger strategies to modernize, streamline, and digitize processes. Additionally, since Confirmation can be used on a case-by-case basis, the organizations can start small and scale up quickly.
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Appendix A).
Quantified cost data as applied to the composite
Total Costs
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Etr | Costs to Thomson Reuters and for internal efforts | $299 | $59,850 | $59,850 | $59,850 | $179,849 | $149,137 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $299 | $59,850 | $59,850 | $59,850 | $179,849 | $149,137 | |
Costs To Thomson Reuters And For Internal Efforts
Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations’ paid Thomson Reuters based on the number of confirmations completed with Confirmation.
- Interviewees explained that the costs to Thomson Reuters to use Confirmation were straightforward and calculated on a per-confirmation basis.
- While the effort needed for adoption varied and depended on certain factors (e.g., the scope of the implementation and whether an API was used), most interviewees reported that their organization’s adoption of Confirmation required minimal effort. The audit director said, “I think you could just get training in a day and get it set up and away you go.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite completes1,500 confirmations per year with Confirmation.
- The price is $38 per confirmation.
- One FTE dedicates 5 hours to the adoption of Confirmation.
- The fully burdened hourly salary of this FTE is $57.
- Pricing may vary. Contact Thomson Reuters for additional details.
Risks. The costs to Thomson Reuters and for internal efforts will vary based on:
- The number and type of confirmations completed with Confirmation.
- The scope of the implementation.
- Whether or not an API is used.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $149,000.
Costs To Thomson Reuters And For Internal Efforts
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Confirmations | Composite | 0 | 1,500 | 1,500 | 1,500 | |
| E2 | Cost per confirmation | Interviews | $38 | $38 | $38 | ||
| E3 | Internal efforts related to adoption | Interviews | $285 | ||||
| Et | Costs to Thomson Reuters and for internal efforts | E3+(E1*E2) | $285 | $57,000 | $57,000 | $57,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
| Etr | Costs to Thomson Reuters and for internal efforts (risk-adjusted) | $299 | $59,850 | $59,850 | $59,850 | ||
| Three-year total: $179,849 | Three-year present value: $149,137 | ||||||
Consolidated Three-Year Risk-Adjusted Metrics
Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)
Total costs Total benefits Cumulative net benefits-
The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.
These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.
Cash Flow Analysis (Risk-Adjusted Estimates)
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($299) | ($59,850) | ($59,850) | ($59,850) | ($179,849) | ($149,137) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $100,737 | $100,737 | $100,737 | $302,210 | $250,518 |
| Net benefits | ($299) | $40,887 | $40,887 | $40,887 | $122,361 | $101,381 |
| ROI | 68% | |||||
| Payback | <6 months | |||||
Appendix A: Total Economic Impact
Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists vendors in communicating the value proposition of their products and services to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of IT initiatives to both senior management and other key business stakeholders.
Total Economic Impact Approach
-
Benefits represent the value delivered to the business by the product. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and the measure of costs, allowing for a full examination of the effect of the technology on the entire organization.
-
Costs consider all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the product. The cost category within TEI captures incremental costs over the existing environment for ongoing costs associated with the solution.
-
Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. Having the ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.
-
Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”
The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.
Appendix B: Endnotes
1 Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists vendors in communicating the value proposition of their products and services to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of IT initiatives to both senior management and other key business stakeholders.
PDF
