Increased Efficiency Across FP&A And Reporting Activities

Evidence and data. Interviewees said FP&A teams recaptured substantial time as Anaplan replaced fragmented spreadsheets and manual data preparation with integrated planning models, harmonized structures, and increased automation. Interviewees reported faster planning and forecast cycles, fewer manual reconciliations, and greater analyst focus on scenario analysis and decision support. As planning expanded to more domains and users, these gains scaled across planners, analysts, and contributors participating in enterprise planning.

• Interviewees described eliminating substantial manual effort previously spent collecting inputs, reconciling versions, stitching spreadsheets, and copying data across disconnected files and models, enabling smoother planning cycles and more timely submissions from contributor teams.

• Interviewees said that standardized structures, baseline forecasts, and automated data flows reduced rework and allowed analysts and planners to shift more time toward scenario modeling, sensitivity analysis, and decision support.

• The head of business intelligence planning in healthcare said: “We shifted all of the planning — something like 4,000 cost centers globally — into a single model. … A fairly small team [are] now responsible for planning those 4,000 cost centers.”

• The same interviewee added: “There’s no more data‑jockeying. … [Automation] moves data between models … from the ERP to Anaplan and from Anaplan back to reporting systems.”

• The VP, controller in healthcare said adoption of Anaplan allowed their team to shift from mechanical tasks to higher‑value analysis, facilitating an 88% reduction in effort: “My involvement with [these processes] has probably gone from 32 hours a month to four. … [They’re asking me] to do more of analysis [and] drive value. … I can give you three to four weeks a month [whereas before] I could only give you two.”

• The IT portfolio lead in consulting said: “There was a 20% reduction in planning cycle time, and we increased not only productivity but accuracy, too. … We’re spending 50% less time doing the planning.” The interviewee also noted a 90% reduction in effort associated with rolling compensation planning, as well as a 60% reduction in shadow‑accounting spreadsheets that previously required significant manual reconciliation.

• The same interviewee added: “Leaders can self‑serve now. … They don’t have to wait for someone to pull the numbers for them.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

• The composite has 40 planner FTEs tasked with core FP&A activities such as planning, forecasting, modeling, and decision support.

• Before Anaplan, these planner roles spent 70% of their time on core FP&A activities, including spreadsheet consolidation, version management, data gathering, and variance reconciliation.

• In Year 1, the net time saved and reallocated to value‑added tasks — such as analysis, scenario modeling, decision support — is 30%. This percentage increases to 50% in Year 2 and 60% in Year 3 due to standardized planning structures, automated data refreshes, and increased adoption of connected inputs and baseline forecasts across teams.

• The composite includes 120 supporting FP&A analyst FTEs responsible for data preparation, model maintenance, executing forecast cycles, and validating departmental submissions.

• Analysts spent 40% of their time on FP&A‑related tasks before Anaplan.

• In Year 1, analysts achieve 20% net time savings. This increases to 35% in Year 2 and 40% in Year 3 as workflow standardization, automated validations, and centralized templates reduce reconciliation cycles and manual data manipulation.

• The composite also includes 240 contributor FTEs (e.g., cost center managers, department leads, and business stakeholders) who previously spent 10% of their time submitting, reviewing, and adjusting planning inputs.

• Contributors save 10% of their time in Year 1 and 15% in Years 2 and 3 as controlled input workflows, structured submission templates, and integrated data sources reduce follow‑up iterations and rework.

• The average fully burdened annual salary for an FP&A and finance FTE participating in planning, analysis, and reporting activities is $124,800.

Risks. This benefit can vary across organizations due to differences in:

• The maturity and standardization of existing planning processes, including baseline reliance on spreadsheets, manual reconciliations, or fragmented models across divisions.

• The experience level and analytical sophistication of FP&A teams, which can affect how quickly they can adopt automation, use baselines, and shift time to value‑added analysis.

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 $9.1 million.

Increased Efficiency Across Group Close And Consolidation Activities

Evidence and data. Interviewees described materially faster group close and consolidation cycles after moving off spreadsheet‑based or legacy on‑premises processes. Standardized mappings, automated data flows, and consistent structures reduced rework and enabled controllers and accountants to shift time from mechanics to review and analysis. Several interviewees highlighted faster onboarding of entities and lower audit effort due to clearer lineage.

• The director of accounting in financial services said: “It would usually take us three weeks to do our quarterly consolidation and inevitably there will be errors built into it. [Anaplan] has cut that down — start to finish, after our internal management review, was a week, and then the review process took four days. [The review was a] week and a half [before] so it’s cut it down by two-thirds … and it’s a lot less error prone.”

• The VP, controller in healthcare said, “[Closing the books], getting the reports up, doing all the covenants and review [was] about a two‑week process. … Most of our bottlenecks are on the transactions [and] general ledger side of things. … [Anaplan] made it so that I don’t have to do as much work and I’m able to delegate more — we’ve [reduced that effort by roughly] 20 hours a month.”

• Interviewees also emphasized that the shift from manual data collection, exports, and tying back to source systems (e.g., data integrity checks) to automated data flows reduced the recurring effort required to prepare consolidated results, enabling supporting accountants and analysts to spend meaningfully less time validating inputs, correcting mappings, and managing journal activity.

• Interviewees reported that standardized structures and consistent mapping logic reduced follow‑up cycles with contributor teams and limited rework, leading to smoother data submission, fewer adjustments, and less time spent resolving discrepancies during close.

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

• The composite has 20 accountant and controller FTEs tasked with core group close and consolidation activities, such as oversight, review, and financial reporting.

• These primary users spent 60% of their time on core group close and consolidation activities before deploying Anaplan.

• In Year 1, the net time saved and reallocated to other value-added tasks is 40%. This increases to 60% in Year 2 and 70% in Year 3 due to increasing levels of automation, improved data quality, and reduced manual data integrity checks as users gain fluency with Anaplan and more entities adopt standardized processes.

• The composite has 60 supporting accountant and analyst FTEs conducting data validations, journal activity, and consolidation processing.

• These users spent 30% of their time on these tasks prior to Anaplan.

• In Year 1, the net time saved and reallocated to other value-added tasks in 25%. This increases to 40% in Year 2 and 50% in Year 3 due to streamlined data ingestion, fewer manual corrections, automated validations, and reduced journal and consolidation processing effort as the organization standardizes on a single source of truth.

• The composite has 120 contributor FTEs tasked with data submission tasks such providing trial balances and adjustment inputs, which takes 10% of their time before Anaplan.

• Contributors save 5% of their time in Year 1 and 10% of their time in Years 2 and 3 as mapping standardization and structured data submission reduce friction and repeated follow-up.

• The average fully burdened average annual salary for an FTE involved in group close and consolidation activities is $124,800.

Risks. This benefit can vary across organizations due to differences in:

• The complexity of the organization’s entity structure and ownership relationships, which can shape how quickly consolidation work can be automated.

• The skill level and familiarity of accounting teams with structured consolidation tools, influencing the speed of process adoption and reduction of manual journal/logical adjustments.

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 $4.3 million.

SG&A Expense Optimization

Evidence and data. Interviewees discussed how better coverage of SG&A planning, standardized drivers, and faster scenario modeling helped leaders identify and act on savings opportunities earlier. By harmonizing structures, aligning timelines, and increasing cross‑functional visibility (including workforce and overhead planning), interviewees’ organizations reported tighter SG&A discipline and more consistent execution against top‑down targets.

• Interviewees confirmed greater transparency and visibility across SG&A categories that enabled earlier identification of spending patterns, emerging variances, and growing cost‑reduction opportunities across regions and functions.

• Interviewees identified Anaplan as a key enabler of consistent planning structures, shared drivers, and faster scenario cycles that reduced duplicative SG&A work and improved execution against budget targets.

• The head of business intelligence planning in healthcare described a successful initiative enabled by Anaplan, noting, “In 2022, they initiated [a program to enact] sustainable savings of $150 million a year.”

• The IT portfolio lead in consulting said, “Forecast accuracy increased [and] cost optimization improved by [around] 10% to 20%.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

• The composite generates $5 billion in revenue annually.

• In Year 1, 40% of SG&A expense is planned within Anaplan, increasing to 80% in Year 2 and 90% in Year 3 as more SG&A categories and regions adopt standardized planning.

• The composite’s SG&A expense ratio is 25% across all years.

• Enhanced planning, standardized drivers, and faster scenario analysis reduce the SG&A ratio by 0.5% in Year 1, 1.0% in Year 2, and 1.5% in Year 3.

• Interviewees estimated that 20% of these improvements are attributable to Anaplan.

Risks. This benefit can vary across organizations due to differences in:

• Leadership commitment to standardized planning processes and willingness to act on SG&A insights.

• Organizational size, geographic dispersion, and functional complexity.

• Degree to which cost center owners adopt shared drivers, performance measures, and accountability mechanisms during planning cycles.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 15%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $3.9 million.

Improved Forecast Accuracy And Financial Predictability

Evidence and data. Interviewees reported more accurate, timely forecasts — enabled by connected models, standard structures, and faster scenario cycles — leading to tighter forecast realization and fewer late topside adjustments. Interviewed finance and business leaders cited earlier visibility into pipeline and demand signals, fewer misses against quota or targets, and greater confidence in forward‑looking numbers.

• Interviewees confirmed that connected models reduced manual reconciliation and provided earlier visibility into trends affecting revenue and expenses.

• Some interviewees described fewer late adjustments and stronger alignment between operating plans and financial forecasts as a result of consistent structures and validated data.

• The head of business intelligence planning in healthcare said, “Because everything is standardized globally now, it’s so much easier to understand where the business is trending.”

• The IT portfolio lead in consulting said: “Forecast accuracy [has] increased. … We saw a 5% increase in [sales] quota attainment. Of course, if everybody is attaining their quotas or getting better attainment … sales lead the revenue, so obviously there’s going to be an impact to the bottom line.”

• The senior manager in consulting said: “We are providing forecasting for both sales and revenue. … They are AI models … forecasting further into the future than the pipeline we have.”

• The IT portfolio lead added: “[Machine learning models] didn’t factor in the white space. … What we’re building now gives us the ability to understand white space [and] the things we don’t know … to build a forecast model that’s going to be accurate.”

• The director of accounting in financial services said: “It provides more comfort in the numbers. … They’re not coming off [a spreadsheet]. … [Anaplan] is the data warehouse [and] provides a lot of comfort.”

Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:

• The composite generates $5 billion in revenue annually.

• Improvements in forecast realization attributable to faster scenario cycles, more integrated planning, and standardized structures yield a 2% uplift in revenue forecast accuracy in Years 1 to 3.

• Interviewees attributed 10% of this improvement to Anaplan.

• The composite organization requires time to adopt more accurate forecasting processes; therefore, the ramp‑up to full realization is 50% in Year 1, 75% in Year 2, and 100% in Year 3.

• The composite’s operating margin is 12% applied to realized variance reduction.

Risks. This benefit can vary across organizations due to differences in:

• The maturity of historical data, driver models, and forecasting inputs.

• The complexity and volatility of the business model.

• The organization’s discipline in maintaining forecast cadence and data governance.

• The extent to which teams adopt advanced forecasting features such as scenario modeling or predictive algorithms.

Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 20%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.8 million.

Unquantified Benefits

Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:

• Improved data consistency and standardization. Interviewees reported that Anaplan helped unify definitions, align timelines, and eliminate the inconsistent spreadsheets that previously fragmented planning across regions and teams. Leaders described moving from disconnected, locally maintained models to a harmonized structure administered directly by finance teams, improving transparency, reducing risk, and creating a more reliable foundation for planning and consolidation.

• Enhanced collaboration and visibility. Interviewees said integrated planning replaced siloed workflows with shared numbers and aligned assumptions. Finance, workforce, and sales teams collaborated earlier and more effectively because everyone worked from the same structures and definitions. Leaders said that visibility into different segments earlier in the cycle enabled more proactive conversations, faster alignment on key drivers, and earlier course‑corrections when conditions changed. The IT portfolio lead in consulting said: “[Anaplan] completely changed the conversation as soon as we were able to have finance and our workforce planning [integrated]. Being a consulting company, [our workforce] is our bread and butter. … Those two being in the same system and internally interconnected was game changing for us.”

• Improved employee experience and upskilling. Interviews discussed how Anaplan reduced manual work, lowered stress during peak cycles, and freed them to apply judgment and analysis rather than chase data. Several interviewed leaders described a shift from clerical work to higher‑value analysis, improving morale, supporting professional development, and reducing dependence on a small number of technical experts.

• Faster scenario modeling and responsiveness. Interviewees said Anaplan enabled rapid scenario building that previously would have taken days in spreadsheets. As a result, leaders could explore alternatives in real time, support strategic conversations with data, and respond more quickly to changing conditions. Interviewees said this speed and consistency improved confidence in scenario outputs and supported timelier, data‑driven decisions.

• Reduced audit effort and review cycles. Anaplan’s standardized consolidation structures and clearer data lineage enabled more efficient external audit processes for the interviewees’ organizations, reducing the time auditors spend validating adjustments and reviewing journal activity. The VP, controller in the healthcare industry reported that their organization’s audit firm required significantly fewer hours than anticipated after Anaplan was implemented and issued a $25,000 fee credit when actual auditor effort came in below expectations.

Flexibility

The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Anaplan and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:

• Expandable planning framework that supports future functional growth. Interviewees described how Anaplan’s modeling environment supported ongoing expansion into new planning domains, enabled their organizations to scale planning and consolidation processes without proportional increases in effort, and provided optionality in how and when to onboard additional business units. Interviewees said the platform’s structure made it straightforward to extend models, incorporate new entities, and adapt planning frameworks as the business evolved. They emphasized that standardized logic and reusable components reduced rework and enabled expansion to occur in a controlled way administered directly by finance teams.
  Interviewees noted that they could bring additional business units, new acquisitions, or adjacent planning areas into the platform with limited incremental effort. As one interviewee explained, adding newly acquired operations required only a short mapping exercise and minimal retraining, reflecting the benefits of standardized structures and finance‑managed administration. The director of accounting in financial services said: “Adding new acquisitions is a couple hours. … The system just takes it.”

• Scalable architecture that helps evolve and refine planning approaches. Interviewees discussed how their organizations designed flexible models that could support expanded forecasting horizons, additional planning drivers, or broader enterprise workflows as needs changed. Several noted that the platform allowed their organizations to build upon the initial deployment and progressively mature scenario modeling, integrated planning, and global standardization as capabilities and business requirements evolved. The senior manager in consulting explained: “[The organization] wanted to accomplish more than just implementing a tool. We went after process. We implemented best practices. We introduced standardization globally, in addition to the data piece. … If we’re going to do it, we’re going to do it right. … Building in that flexibility to ensure that they could pivot and shift in the future was [essential in] anything we built.”

Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Total Economic Impact Approach).