The Total Economic Impact™ Of OneStream
Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By OneStream
A Forrester Total Economic Impact™ Study Commissioned By OneStream, September 2024
The value of modern finance lies not in eliminating complexity but in navigating it. Businesses are constantly expecting more from finance, and executives must drive real impact across the business by accessing all data, everywhere, within their organization. To do this, they need modern, agile, and purpose-built planning and analytics solutions that provide insights across various business functions, enabling not only proactive leadership but — more importantly — top- and bottom-line results.
OneStream is an enterprise finance platform that unifies financial and operational data, embeds AI for better decisions and productivity, and lets businesses keep adding capabilities without adding technical debt. It automates core tasks to help finance stop chasing numbers and begin to strategically support the business to excel in today’s dynamic financial landscape.
OneStream commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying OneStream.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of OneStream on their organizations.
Return on investment (ROI)
172%172%
Net present value (NPV)
$5.61M$5.61M
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed four representatives with experience using OneStream. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the interviewees’ experiences and combined the results into a single composite organization that is a B2C organization with revenue of $1 billion per year.
Interviewees said that prior to using OneStream, their organizations struggled to get the financial information they needed in timely business-critical decisions. Without having access to all the financial information in one place, the interviewees’ organizations struggled to get an accurate view of the best path forward and forced teams to course correct too late. However, prior attempts to simplify their financial operations yielded limited success, leaving them with too many disparate tools whose clunky integrations left teams manually entering and reconciling the data well into the night. These limitations led to limited visibility, limited reach, and ultimately, limited impact.
After the investment in OneStream, the interviewees could not only reallocate internal financial planning and analysis (FP&A) and IT resources to higher-value activities as their employees found efficiencies using the platform, but also create insights with greater frequency and reliability as they unlocked new capabilities to tell the business which levers it could pull through sensible machine learning data.
Key Findings
Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
- A 25% reduction in staff travel and expense (T&E) and overtime costs as well as avoided forecasting labor due to OneStream’s sensible machine learning insights valued at $6.2 million. OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning (ML) enables the composite organization to sift through multiple data points, including weather patterns, to more accurately forecast field staffing needs, reducing T&E expenses and overtime. Additionally, OneStream’s ability to automatically produce forecasts saves the composite organization’s FP&A team the manual effort of creating these quarterly forecasts.
For , reduction in staff travel and expense and overtime costs and avoided forecasting labor might be worth over three years.
- A 75% reduction in FP&A team time spent on monthly reporting and other reporting and data loading efficiencies valued at $787,000. The composite organization experiences several efficiencies with OneStream, including a reduced number of days in the budget cycle, shortened effort needed for audit and compliance, reduced hours for the monthly close, and improved data loading by IT. The benefits from OneStream allow the composite organization to connect directly to source systems, eliminating the need for time-consuming integrations.
For , a reduction in FP&A team time spent on monthly reporting and other reporting and data loading efficiencies might be valued at over three years.
- A 25% productivity and effectiveness improvement for the controller team valued at $1.1 million. OneStream helps the composite organization’s controller team make better decisions faster by utilizing information without the need to continually move, copy, and reconcile data. By creating more efficient processes around reporting, developing financial strategies, budgeting, risk management, and internal controls, controllers see a 25% effectiveness and productivity improvement with OneStream that allows them to spend additional time on value-added tasks.
For , productivity and effectiveness improvements for the controller team might be worth over three years.
- A 90% reduction in legacy environment run cost by Year 3 valued at $788,000. By switching to the OneStream enterprise finance platform, the composite organization decommissions five of its existing tools. Along with the licenses of these tools, the composite organization avoids other sunk costs (e.g., hardware costs, upgrade costs, administrators, disaster recovery costs, third-party enhancements, etc.) and achieves further efficiencies by unifying its data under the OneStream platform.
For , a reduction in legacy environment run costs might be valued at over three years.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the interviewees’ organizations but are not quantified for this study include:
- Enhanced support via customer community channels. Interviewees shared that the helpfulness of the OneStream customer community was a differentiator in the marketplace. Furthermore, they appreciated access to the OneStream Solution Exchange, which allowed them to download, configure, and deploy solutions that extended the value of their OneStream platform instance.
- Expedited improvements to OneStream offerings through customer feedback. Interviewees said they appreciate that OneStream offered ways for customers to put their ideas forward, such as IdeaStream. They felt that their feedback was often heard and put on OneStream’s product roadmap for future product releases.
- Enabled success through customer support. interviewees repeatedly praised OneStream for creating a strong customer experience at every stage of the customer lifecycle and providing exceptional support.
- Improved employee experience. Because OneStream unified data and saved employees time from reentering, reconciling, and manually moving data sources, the interviewees overwhelmingly said that employees at their respective organizations were happier.
- Heightened compliance. Instead of trying to locate data across one of multiple spreadsheets or other data silos, OneStream created a unified single source of truth, making the interviewees’ organizations compliance efforts much cleaner and more organized than before.
- Enriched data accuracy. The interviewees appreciated that OneStream provided their controllers with timely and accurate data, enabling them to create insightful reports and analyses to maintain a competitive edge.
Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:
- OneStream licensing fees. The composite organization pays an annual licensing fee for their OneStream platform, which includes OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning (ML) and 102 users.
For , OneStream licensing fees might cost over three years.
- Implementation costs. The composite organization opts to use a preferred OneStream partner along with a select internal cross-functional team to help implement OneStream. In phase one, it implements Close, Consolidation, Reporting, and Sensible ML, which takes a total of nine months. In phase two, the composite organization implements Planning and in phase three, it implements People Planning and Account Reconciliation.
For , implementation costs might total over three years.
- Ongoing management and training costs. The composite organization continues to use its OneStream partner for professional services for ongoing management each quarter as well as 8 hours per month from an IT resource. For training, initially the composite organization has its finance, controller, and IT staff train for two weeks on the platform and their function leaders train for 2 hours. Going forward, all resources dedicate time to training, which includes attendance at OneStream conferences and events.
For , ongoing management and training costs might total over three years.
The representative interviews and financial analysis found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $8.87 million over three years versus costs of $3.26 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $5.61 million and an ROI of 172%.
might experience benefits of over three years versus costs of , adding up to a new present value of and an ROI of 0%.
Key Statistics
-
Return on investment (ROI)
172%172%
-
Benefits PV
$8.87M$8.87M
-
Net present value (NPV)
$5.61M$5.61M
-
Payback
7 months7 months
Benefits (Three-Year)
Reduction in labor costs due to sensible machine learning insights Reporting and data loading efficiencies Controller team productivity improvement Technical debt savings
TEI Framework And Methodology
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in OneStream.
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 OneStream can have on an organization.
-
Due Diligence
Interviewed OneStream stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to OneStream.
-
Interviews
Interviewed four representatives at organizations using OneStream 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 OneStream 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 OneStream. For the interactive functionality using Configure Data/Custom Data, the intent is for the questions to solicit inputs specific to a prospect’s business. Forrester believes that this analysis is representative of what companies may achieve with OneStream based on the inputs provided and any assumptions made. Forrester does not endorse OneStream or its offerings. Although great care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of this model, OneStream and Forrester Research are unable to accept any legal responsibility for any actions taken on the basis of the information contained herein. The interactive tool is provided ‘AS IS,’ and Forrester and OneStream make no warranties of any kind.
OneStream 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.
OneStream provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Consulting Team:
Stephanie Slate
Sarah Lervold
Drivers leading to the OneStream investment
Interviews
| Role | Industry | Number Of Employees | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manager, group reporting | Construction | 6,000 | €2.9 billion |
| Senior manager, finance systems | IT services consulting | 120,000 | $51 billion |
| CIO | Utility services | 1,500 | $150 million |
| Corporate systems and process manager | Manufacturing | 12,000 | $3 billion |
Key Challenges
Before deploying the OneStream platform, the interviewees’ organizations relied on legacy enterprise performance management tools, including Excel files with manual calculations, which resulted in siloed systems and processes. This fragmentation prevented a unified view of their finances. Interviewees described their frustration with the large administrative burden these processes created for their teams. The constant moving, validating, and reconciling of data between systems coupled with the lack of a centralized data location led to inefficiencies, an increased risk of errors, and limitations in gaining insights from their financial data.
The interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
- Siloed systems and processes. As their organizations grew, the interviewees described how they purchased spot solutions to address specific issues. This led to an ever-increasing number of disparate systems that required constant manual data movement and reconciliation. Despite the efforts to make things easier, numerous integrations were needed to perform basic functions, resulting in even more complexities. A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm described their prior environment, sharing: “Our profits and loss is a combination of function and accounts, and we were manually building that. Every person who was running reports was manually putting all those pieces together, resulting in everyone having a different view; no one had consistent reporting.”
- Questionable data quality. Siloed systems and processes led to questionable data quality for the interviewees’ organizations, especially when using spreadsheets, which are error prone. Legacy enterprise performance management (EPM) systems, which used batch-based processes to run allocations once per day, forced teams to wait until the next morning to check their results. If the finance team needed to make a change, they had to repeat the same slow and time-consuming process. This not only created a poor experience but, as the business grew, the data quality became increasingly questionable due to the lack of full system integration.
- Outdated technology and technical debt. Old systems required constant updates, incurring hardware and upgrade costs. Even though OneStream is not a panacea for all the old outdated systems, the costs were still considerable to interviewees, especially as they revealed they often overlooked additional expenses associated with maintaining these tools. For instance, a CIO from a utility services company mentioned ongoing costs for data management, disaster recovery, and licensing within their legacy environment. Beyond financial considerations, interviewees noted that their outdated systems hindered the extraction of valuable insights. This limitation in their finance systems left their organizations vulnerable, potentially missing crucial insights that could drive business impacts.
- Inability to scale the enterprise. A lack of a centralized finance solution was an obstacle to collaboration at the interviewees’ organizations and often resulted in poor accuracy and limited insight into business data, the drivers of projections, and explanations of how forecasts were developed. Moreover, because many of the tasks were highly manual, i.e., the interviewees’ organizations needed to manually populate, refresh, and pull data for planning, reporting, and forecasting cycles, it was difficult to scale activities as demand grew. A manager of group reporting at a construction company shared their experience, saying, “One of the difficulties we had with the previous system was the scalability, so it was kind of at its maximum in terms of what it could offer in terms of dimensionality.”
- Myopic perspective based on outcomes. Interviewees noted that for many finance teams, late hours and stress around monthly, quarterly, and annual close are part of the job. Interviewees described ordering pizza well into the night, missing children’s events, and other frustrations. But, when pressed, they said that while it’s painful, it’s reasonable and how they got the job done. Interviewees expressed that many of their peers claim “they close in 10 days” but the reality is that their teams are spending hours in the office and “sleeping on the floor when necessary.”
Investment Objectives
The interviewees’ organizations searched for a solution that could:
- Provide a unified platform that streamlines critical finance processes and empowers the enterprise with financial and operational insights.
- Create one true data model that allows for visibility on how the organization spends money and how effectively it is executing its goals.
- Generate forecasting accuracy to improve margins or, as the organization may grow through mergers and acquisitions, provide sophisticated reporting.
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 four 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 global, business-to-consumer organization has $1 billion in annual revenue and provides sales, customer support, and service/warranty support for its consumer products in high volume. This requires 250 field workers to support its customer base, which means spending $60,000 annually on travel and expenses for each field worker. To get overtime and travel and expense costs under control, as well as remove some of the technical debt as its legacy tools neared end of life, the composite organization opts to invest OneStream to gain streamlined operations for its business finances.
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization collaborates with a OneStream partner as well as a cross-functional internal team (finance and IT) to complete a phased approach of their OneStream platform instance. In phase one, it implements OneStream Close, Consolidation, Reporting, and Sensible ML. In phase two, it implements Planning and in phase three, it implements People Planning and Account Reconciliation. Because the metadata is carried over, the phase one implementation lasts nine months while phase two and phase three implementation lasts three and five months, respectively. During the subsequent phases, because the metadata is already in place, the composite organization needs less internal support, requiring only 50% of the internal team for phase two and 25% of them for phase three. Once implemented, the composite organization has 35 FP&A professionals, 12 controllers, 11 IT professionals, and 44 other function leaders trained on the platform and using it.
Quantified benefit data as applied to the composite
Total Benefits
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Reduction in labor costs due to sensible machine learning insights | $1,916,160 $1,916,160 | $2,530,200 $2,530,200 | $3,139,560 $3,139,560 | $7,585,920 $7,585,920 | $6,191,836 $6,191,836 |
| Btr | Reporting and data loading efficiencies | $316,438 $316,438 | $316,438 $316,438 | $316,438 $316,438 | $949,314 $949,314 | $786,934 $786,934 |
| Ctr | Controller team productivity improvement | $442,868 $442,868 | $442,868 $442,868 | $442,868 $442,868 | $1,328,603 $1,328,603 | $1,101,346 $1,101,346 |
| Dtr | Technical debt savings | $225,000 $225,000 | $337,500 $337,500 | $405,000 $405,000 | $967,500 $967,500 | $787,754 $787,754 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $2,900,466 $2,900,466 | $3,627,006 $3,627,006 | $4,303,866 $4,303,866 | $10,831,337 $10,831,337 | $8,867,870 $8,867,870 | |
Reduction In Labor Costs Due To Sensible Machine Learning Insights
Evidence and data. The interviewees emphasized the importance of agility in navigating a constantly evolving business landscape, particularly for those in the field. Decision-makers across the business needed real-time insights into how the business was performing and needed help deciding what to do next. Interviewees said they wanted granular performance metrics to know the true profitability and opportunities associated with different products, services, locations, and more — and that OneStream’s Sensible ML provided these insights to them.
- A CIO at a utility services company shared that their field team’s travel expenses had been halved with OneStream’s Sensible ML. They were more accurately able to predict the number of employees needed for jobs and did not have them waiting idly for those jobs to begin.
- Because Sensible ML automatically creates forecasts, interviewees shared that they could reallocate those employees to other tasks. A CIO of a utility services company described this, saying, “After implementing the tool, the budgeting forecasting process we [did prior required] a full reforecast every quarter and now we do a smaller limited forecast every month.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization has 250 field workers with an average annual travel and expense cost of $60,000 per worker.
has 0 field workers with an average annual travel and expense cost of $0 per worker.
- By using OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning insights, the composite organization more accurately forecasts weather patterns, busy seasons, etc., to help it successfully plan for appropriate field staffing needs. In Year 1, the composite organization saves 15% of T&E costs from these insights. As the composite organization understands and utilizes the sensible machine learning insights, it increases its savings to 20% in Year 2 and 25% in Year 3.
By using OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning insights, might more accurately forecast weather patterns, busy seasons, etc., to help it successfully plan for appropriate field staffing needs. In Year 1, might save 15% of T&E costs from these insights and increase savings to 20% in Year 2 and 25% in Year 3.
- The fully burdened hourly rate for a field worker is $39.
- The composite organization designates three months each year as its busy season. During these months, each field worker incurs 20 hours of overtime each month.
might designate three months each year as its busy season. During these months, each field worker might incur 20 hours of overtime each month.
- With OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning insights, the composite organization can successfully plan for appropriate field staffing needs and decreased the amount of overtime incurred and in Year 1, it decreases the percentage of overtime by 20%. As the composite organization understands and utilizes the Sensible Machine Learning insights, it continues to decrease the percentage of overtime for its staff, seeing a 23% decrease in Year 2 and 25% in Year 3.
might decrease the percentage of overtime by 20% in Year 1, 23% in Year 2, and 25% in Year 3.
- Prior to using OneStream, the composite organization relied on three finance team members to create quarterly forecasts around staffing. It took each team member 50 hours to create each quarterly forecast. With OneStream’s Sensible Machine Learning insights, these forecasts are now automatically created, and the composite organization reallocates its finance team staff to other tasks.
relies on 0 finance team members to create quarterly forecasts around staffing with each team member spending 50 hours to create each quarterly forecast.
- The fully burdened hourly rate for a finance team member is $47.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this benefit will vary depending on:
- The number of field workers an organization has and the average annual travel and expense cost it spends per worker.
- The fully burdened hourly cost of a field worker.
- The number of months an organization designates as its busy season and the number of overtime hours incurred each month by its workers.
- The number of hours finance team members need to create quarterly forecasts and their fully burdened hourly cost.
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 $6.2 million.
For , this benefit might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Reduction In Labor Costs Due To Sensible Machine Learning Insights
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Number of workers in the field | CompositeComposite | 250250 | 250250 | 250250 |
| A2 | Average T&E cost per field worker | CompositeComposite | $60,000 $60,000 | $60,000 $60,000 | $60,000 $60,000 |
| A3 | Annual cost of field worker T&E | A1*A2 | $15,000,000 $15,000,000 | $15,000,000 $15,000,000 | $15,000,000 $15,000,000 |
| A4 | T&E savings attributable to OneStream sensible machine learning insights | Interviews | 15%15% | 20%20% | 25%25% |
| A5 | Subtotal: Reduction in staff T&E due to OneStream sensible machine learning insights | A3*A4 | $2,250,000 $2,250,000 | $3,000,000 $3,000,000 | $3,750,000 $3,750,000 |
| A6 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a field worker | CompositeComposite | $39 $39 | $39 $39 | $39 $39 |
| A7 | Number of months that are considered busy season | CompositeComposite | 33 | 33 | 33 |
| A8 | Number of overtime hours incurred during busy season per worker per month | Interviews | 2020 | 2020 | 2020 |
| A9 | Percentage of overtime decreased due to OneStream machine learning insights | Interviews | 20%20% | 23%23% | 25%25% |
| A10 | Subtotal: Reduction in overtime costs due to OneStream sensible machine learning insights | A1*A6*A7*A8*A9 | $117,000 $117,000 | $134,550 $134,550 | $146,250 $146,250 |
| A11 | Number of staffing forecasts created per year | CompositeTEI case study | 44 | 44 | 44 |
| A12 | Number of finance personnel needed to create quarterly forecasts | CompositeScaled for | 33 | 33 | 33 |
| A13 | Number of hours needed to create quarterly forecasts per finance FTE | Interviews | 5050 | 5050 | 5050 |
| A14 | Fully burdened hourly rate of a finance FTE | CompositeTEI case study | $47 $47 | $47 $47 | $47 $47 |
| A15 | Subtotal: Avoided finance team forecasting labor due to OneStream sensible machine learning insights | A11*A12*A13*A14 | $28,200 $28,200 | $28,200 $28,200 | $28,200 $28,200 |
| At | Reduction in labor costs due to sensible machine learning insights | A5+A10+A15 | $2,395,200 $2,395,200 | $3,162,750 $3,162,750 | $3,924,450 $3,924,450 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓20% | ||||
| Atr | Reduction in labor costs due to sensible machine learning insights (risk-adjusted) | $1,916,160 $1,916,160 | $2,530,200 $2,530,200 | $3,139,560 $3,139,560 | |
| Three-year total: $7,585,920 $7,585,920 | Three-year present value: $6,191,836 $6,191,836 | ||||
Reporting And Data Loading Efficiencies
Evidence and data. All the interviewees shared that one of the main drivers of purchasing was the hope that the platform would spare their FP&A teams from low- and no-productivity number assemblage. Spreadsheets models were nearly impossible to run on a network and highly prone to errors, which meant that FP&A teams had to chase down numbers to try to get an understanding on how important metrics were generated. By switching to OneStream, interviewees said that FP&A teams were able to connect historical numbers to current results or projections with ease, eliminating the burden of work-making spreadsheet models and reports. Finance staff were able to spend more time on value-added work that focused on steering the business forward.
- A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm described their reporting process with their legacy tools, sharing, “Our performance was horrible in our old systems. It took us over 4 hours to load the data, consolidate it, and translate and consolidate it.” They were excited to share the clear change they saw with OneStream, saying, “Now it’s about 5 minutes for month one, 25 minutes in month 12. They actually do it every hour.”
- A senior manager of finance systems at an IT services consulting firm painted the picture of their organization’s experience before implementing OneStream by highlighting how FP&A staff had to idly sit and wait for results. They shared, “You can imagine is the person was working on their submission or inputs for 2 hours a day or three max, and then had to wait till the next morning to see the results.” The impact of OneStream was clear for this interviewee, who shared: “Right now, it’s an on-demand functionality, not batch-based, which is the biggest improvement. Whenever they are making their input, they have the function to click on a button, run their allocations by module. One module takes like 3 to 5 minutes max, and then they can see the result immediately so it’s a significant reduction in the process.”
- A CIO of a utility services company echoed the effect OneStream had on their organization’s close cycle, sharing: “From a strictly close perspective on a monthly basis, [before] it took us roughly two weeks to close the books, sometimes a little longer. We’re down to four- to five-day range now with OneStream.”
- For a manager of group reporting at a construction company, OneStream improved their organization’s audit process: “There’s so much efficiency with our audit process, especially when auditors are facing more and more stringent audit standards because they have to do more. OneStream allowed our auditor to upgrade their process.” A senior manager of finance systems at an IT services consulting firm echoed with their own experience of how the unified platform simplified the audit process, sharing, “Instead of auditing different applications, now it’s only OneStream that needs to be audited.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization has 35 employees on its Financial Planning and Analysis (FP&A) team, and 30% of those employees support its monthly reporting needs.
has 0 employees on its FP&A team, and 30% of those employees support its monthly reporting needs.
- Prior to using OneStream, the composite organization staff spent 50 hours on monthly reporting. With its single view and unified data, this effort reduces by 75% with OneStream.
might spend 50 hours on monthly reporting before OneStream and might see this effort reduced by 75% with OneStream.
- The fully burdened hourly rate for a finance team member is $47.
- The composite organization has 11 IT personnel who support data loading. Prior to OneStream, each IT resource takes 2 hours to support monthly data loading needs.
has 0 IT personnel who support data loading.
- The fully burdened hourly rate for IT personnel is $62.
- Thirty percent of the FP&A team is dedicated to supporting monthly audit and compliance needs.
- Prior to using OneStream, each of these employees spends 40 hours on this work. With OneStream, the composite organization reduces the number of hours by 50%.
With OneStream, might reduce the number of hours by 50%.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this benefit will vary depending on:
- The number of finance team members the composite organization requires to support their monthly reporting needs, the number of hours those employees spend generating those reports in the prior environment, and their fully burdened hourly cost.
- The number of IT team members the composite organization requires to support their monthly data loading needs, the number of hours those employees spend generating those reports in the prior environment, and their fully burdened hourly cost.
- The number of finance team members the composite organization requires to support their monthly audit and compliance needs and the number of hours those employees spend generating those reports in the prior environment.
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 $787,000.
For , this benefit might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Reporting And Data Loading Efficiencies
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Finance staff | CompositeComposite | 3535 | 3535 | 3535 |
| B2 | Staff supporting monthly reporting (rounded) | B1*30% | 1111 | 1111 | 1111 |
| B3 | Hours spent on monthly reporting in the prior environment per month | Interviews | 5050 | 5050 | 5050 |
| B4 | Percentage reduction in time spent on monthly reporting with OneStream | Interviews | 75%75% | 75%75% | 75%75% |
| B5 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a finance FTE | A14 | $47 $47 | $47 $47 | $47 $47 |
| B6 | Subtotal: Reporting savings | B2*B3*12 months*B4*B5 | $232,650 $232,650 | $232,650 $232,650 | $232,650 $232,650 |
| B7 | IT staff supporting data loading | CompositeComposite | 1111 | 1111 | 1111 |
| B8 | Hours spent on monthly data loading by each IT resource in the prior environment | Interviews | 22 | 22 | 22 |
| B9 | Percentage reduction in time spent on monthly data loading with OneStream | Interviews | 95%95% | 95%95% | 95%95% |
| B10 | Fully burdened hourly rate for an IT FTE | CompositeTEI case study | $62 $62 | $62 $62 | $62 $62 |
| B11 | Subtotal: Data loading savings | B7*B8*12 months*B9*B10 | $15,550 $15,550 | $15,550 $15,550 | $15,550 $15,550 |
| B12 | Finance staff supporting audit and compliance efforts | B2 | 1111 | 1111 | 1111 |
| B13 | Hours spent on monthly audit and compliance preparation in the prior environment | Interviews | 4040 | 4040 | 4040 |
| B14 | Percentage reduction in time spent on quarterly audit and compliance preparation efforts with OneStream | Interviews | 50%50% | 50%50% | 50%50% |
| B15 | Fully burdened hourly rate for a finance FTE | A14 | $47 $47 | $47 $47 | $47 $47 |
| B16 | Subtotal: Audit and compliance preparation savings | B12*B13*12 months*B14*B15 | $124,080 $124,080 | $124,080 $124,080 | $124,080 $124,080 |
| Bt | Reporting and data loading efficiencies | B6+B11+B16 | $372,280 $372,280 | $372,280 $372,280 | $372,280 $372,280 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | ||||
| Btr | Reporting and data loading efficiencies (risk-adjusted) | $316,438 $316,438 | $316,438 $316,438 | $316,438 $316,438 | |
| Three-year total: $949,314 $949,314 | Three-year present value: $786,934 $786,934 | ||||
Controller Team Productivity Improvement
Evidence and data. Because OneStream’s platform provides a common platform infrastructure with a unified data model, interviewees shared that controllers at their organizations experienced productivity efficiencies around reporting, developing financial strategies, budgeting, risk management and setting internal controls. This allowed controllers to make better decisions faster by utilizing information in a single source of truth.
A manager of group reporting at a construction company described the productivity lift their controllers experienced with OneStream vs. Excel, saying: “We had 100 users who spent 80% of their time in Excel and 20% of their time in the other systems. Nowadays, it’s the other way around: 80% of their time is spent in OneStream and 20% on Excel on average. They are saving so much time by staying in one, unified system.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization employs 12 controllers.
employs 0 controllers.
- The average fully burdened annual salary for a controller is $218,700.
- While OneStream does save the controllers time, Forrester assumes that 100% of this time will not be recaptured. People are human and may take additional breaks, stop to chat with a colleague, etc., instead of reinvesting the full time saved back into work. For this reason, Forrester assumes a 75% productivity recapture rate for this benefit.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this benefit will vary depending on:
- The number of controllers employed by an organization.
- The fully burdened salary of a controller.
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 $1.1 million.
For , this benefit might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Controller Team Productivity Improvement
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Controllers | CompositeComposite | 1212 | 1212 | 1212 |
| C2 | General productivity improvement with OneStream | Interviews | 25%25% | 25%25% | 25%25% |
| C3 | Fully burdened annual salary for a controller | CompositeTEI case study | $218,700 $218,700 | $218,700 $218,700 | $218,700 $218,700 |
| C4 | Productivity recapture | CompositeTEI case study | 75%75% | 75%75% | 75%75% |
| Ct | Controller team productivity improvement | C1*C2*C3*C4 | $492,075 $492,075 | $492,075 $492,075 | $492,075 $492,075 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||
| Ctr | Controller team productivity improvement (risk-adjusted) | $442,868 $442,868 | $442,868 $442,868 | $442,868 $442,868 | |
| Three-year total: $1,328,603 $1,328,603 | Three-year present value: $1,101,346 $1,101,346 | ||||
Technical Debt Savings
Evidence and data. As legacy on-premise systems began to see their end of life, interviewees shared that they realized they had a cost obligation to keep these applications and tools running. Along with hardware and hosting costs, the interviewees said that when they crunched the numbers, they were surprised at additional sunk costs they could save by eliminating some of this technical debt.
- Without a doubt, the number-one reason the interviewees purchased the OneStream solution was to unify their finance tools under a single source of truth. They expressed frustration around how they had to continuously pull data through countless integrations and had to manually reconcile those moves each time. The ultimate driver for interviewees to purchase OneStream was to alleviate this experience.
- Many of these legacy systems were manual. A manager of group reporting at a construction company described that not only were their previous systems “old-fashioned,” their organization also relied “80% on manual Excel spreadsheets.” They went on to describe how this limited their ability to scale, “and had some complexities on IT side to maintain the system,” as they couldn’t “take the full advantage of the capabilities they needed.”
- A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm described the clunkiness of the legacy solution in their previous environment. They shared: “We would run [our data] every 4 hours because they wanted it to be as current as possible. It was painful; it was slow. We constantly are doing acquisitions and reorganizing. It was not flexible as far as being able to reorganize the information.” Moreover, they highlighted some of the additional technical debt costs their organization incurred by continuing to run on these legacy systems, saying: “It was expensive. We were paying to host it and paying to have it managed.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization uses five legacy tools to support their financial planning, budgeting, forecasting, consolidating, and reporting needs in the prior environment.
uses 0 legacy tools to support their financial planning, budgeting, forecasting, consolidating, and reporting needs.
- Forrester assumes that the legacy environment incurs various run costs, including those for customer success, disaster recovery, third-party software, data management, upgrades, hardware, administrators, and applications. As a result, the composite spends $100,000 annually to operate each legacy tool.
spends $0 to operate each legacy tool.
- Because the composite organization needs to have access to previous fiscal year data, it opts to do a phased decommissioning of the redundant and duplicative legacy tools. In Year 1, it phases out 50% of its legacy environment. This increases to 75% in Year 2 and 90% in Year 3.
might choose to do a phased decommissioning of redundant and duplicative legacy tools, phasing out 50% in Year 1, 75% by Year 2, and 90% by Year 3.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this benefit will vary depending on:
- The number of redundant and duplicative legacy tools within an organization’s enterprise performance management environment.
- The holistic run costs for each of the legacy tools.
- The percentage of phased decommissioning of legacy tools that an organization opts for.
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 $788,000.
For , this benefit might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Technical Debt Savings
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Number of legacy tools supporting FP&A tasks | CompositeComposite | 55 | 55 | 55 |
| D2 | Legacy environment run cost per tool | CompositeComposite | $100,000 $100,000 | $100,000 $100,000 | $100,000 $100,000 |
| D3 | Subtotal: Legacy environment run cost | D1*D2 | $500,000 $500,000 | $500,000 $500,000 | $500,000 $500,000 |
| D4 | Phased decommissioning of legacy environment | Interviews | 50%50% | 75%75% | 90%90% |
| Dt | Technical debt savings | D3*D4 | $250,000 $250,000 | $375,000 $375,000 | $450,000 $450,000 |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||
| Dtr | Technical debt savings (risk-adjusted) | $225,000 $225,000 | $337,500 $337,500 | $405,000 $405,000 | |
| Three-year total: $967,500 $967,500 | Three-year present value: $787,754 $787,754 | ||||
Unquantified Benefits
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
- Enhanced support via customer community channels. Interviewees commented the OneStream’s customer community provided additional support and allowed them to ask questions of their peers using the platform, leading to further efficiencies. A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm shared their experience, saying: “We help each other. If I have something that I’m trying to do, I can go put it out on the community and within one to two days, someone’s written back whether it’s another customer or partner or OneStream employee will say, ‘Oh yeah, you could do that. This is how you do it.’ Everyone wants to make everyone else successful.” A manager of group reporting at a construction company echoed this notion, sharing: “A lot of people are nowadays working on OneStream. So, I think you can easily source people with relevant experience and knowledge and that’s the knowledge has helped us.”
- Expedited improvements to OneStream offerings through customer feedback. Through forums like IdeaStream, the interviewees felt that OneStream not only heard their feedback but tried to continuously improve on the platform. Moreover, a corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm explained that the focus to continue to build a great product and user experience was obvious, sharing: “OneStream keeps their customers happy by having a good tool and keeping it good and adding capabilities. The amount of capabilities that they add on a biannual basis is amazing.”
- Enabled success through customer support. All interviewees said they experienced a moment in the sale cycle when OneStream presented a paper with a long list of customer names and asked them to call any of them for insights about the platform. A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm said that they know how difficult it is in today’s world to keep 100% of customers happy, but “OneStream works really hard to make sure that all of their customers are happy.” A senior manager of finance systems at an IT services consulting firm credited their OneStream account manager and customer success manager with helping them navigate any issues. They shared: “Both are very dedicated and super helpful so whenever we have problems, they are approachable and available whenever we need them. That alone is a very good advantage compared to our experience with the prior solution. They are really helping us, and they want us to have a good experience with them and grow with them, grow together, and we really feel that.”
- Improved employee experience. When thinking about OneStream, the interviewees noted they consider the rhetorical question, “What’s the ROI of people not quitting?” Allowing their teams to get in and work with data rather than chasing numbers created happier employees. A corporate systems and process manager at a manufacturing firm was excited to share their observations, saying: “I have happy customers, which are my users. That makes me happy. I enjoy what I’m doing because people are not complaining about what they have or don’t have. They’re only asking me about how to do more.”
- Heightened compliance. OneStream was also used by the interviewees to support their organizations’ financial reporting and regulatory reporting requirements. While this wasn’t the most exciting use case, it was a critical one for public and private companies alike.2 A CIO at a utility services company explained how OneStream’s unified platform improved their compliance, saying: “Having the system in place like OneStream means that you’re not searching through 100 different spreadsheet workbooks to look back to find this, to find that there’s a formula wrong. All that stuff goes away. It’s something that we don’t even think about anymore. The compliance side is much better and cleaner than what it was before.”
- Enriched data accuracy. The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed the need for real-time, accurate planning and forecasting across the whole enterprise — and in short order.3 The interviewees shared that OneStream’s connected dimensions allowed for a more accurate and complete view of business decisions in the enterprise. A manager of group reporting at a construction company explained the importance of accuracy in terms of quality, sharing: “Our forecast is also getting better in terms of quality. We still want to increase the frequency of forecasting or reforecasting to get it even better.”
Flexibility
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement OneStream and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
- Enhancing potential incremental profit gains due to sensible machine learning decision-making. Interviewees shared that they are excited to see OneStream is making enhancements to its AI offerings and hope to utilize it to drive potential profit opportunities. These potential revenue growth opportunities can include untapped market opportunities, customer segmentation, focus on high-margin products, etc. as well as additional risk management (avoided losses related to poor decision-making, etc.) While none of the interviewees were able to quantify profit gains with the Sensible ML tool yet, they hypothesized how potential incremental gains could impact their organizations. Forrester created a sample benefit table to show how even a 1% profit uplift would impact the composite organization ($1 billion in annual revenue). Refer to Figure 1 to see the potential future-state analysis.
- Supporting future environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting needs. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requires all large companies and listed small and medium-sized enterprises to disclose information about the risks and opportunities arising from social and environmental issues, as well as the impact of their activities on people and the environment.4 A manager of group reporting at a construction firm shared how their organization is currently ensuring they are ready for the mandated reporting and mentioned how OneStream would be a natural choice. They shared: “We’re still in the early stages of looking into the requirements, which are mandatory for financial year 2025 onwards. By 2026, we need to be able to publish information for ESG reporting and there will also be our considering various toolings and, of course, a logical one would be to use OneStream.”
- Extending the investment by adding OneStream solutions to their instance. Interviewees said that their organizations could expand into new OneStream solutions with confidence knowing that OneStream would support a seamless integration and continue to do so as new products are introduced.
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Appendix A).
Figure 1
Potential Incremental Profit Gains Due To Sensible Machine Learning Decision-Making
Figure 1: Potential Incremental Profit Gains Due To Sensible Machine Learning Decision-Making
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XX1 | Revenue | Composite | $1,000,000,000 | $1,000,000,000 | $1,000,000,000 | |||
| XX2 | Revenue uplift due to improved Sensible Machine Learning decision-making with OneStream | Interviews | 1.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | |||
| XX3 | Operating margin | TEI standard | 10% | 10% | 10% | |||
| XXt | Incremental profit gains due to Sensible Machine Learning decision-making | XX1*XX2*XX3 | $1,000,000 | $1,500,000 | $2,000,000 | |||
| Risk adjustment | ↓20% | |||||||
| XXtr | Incremental profit gains due to Sensible Machine Learning decision-making (risk-adjusted) | $800,000 | $1,200,000 | $1,600,000 | ||||
| Three-year total: $3,600,000 | Three-year present value: $2,921,112 | |||||||
Quantified cost data as applied to the composite
Total Costs
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Etr | OneStream license fees | $0 $0 | $397,950 $397,950 | $397,950 $397,950 | $397,950 $397,950 | $1,193,850 $1,193,850 | $989,643 $989,643 |
| Ftr | Implementation costs | $836,249 $836,249 | $47,708 $47,708 | $39,757 $39,757 | $0 $0 | $923,714 $923,714 | $912,477 $912,477 |
| Gtr | Ongoing management and training costs | $394,196 $394,196 | $326,669 $326,669 | $423,645 $423,645 | $423,645 $423,645 | $1,568,156 $1,568,156 | $1,359,579 $1,359,579 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $1,230,445 $1,230,445 | $772,327 $772,327 | $861,353 $861,353 | $821,595 $821,595 | $3,685,720 $3,685,720 | $3,261,699 $3,261,699 | |
OneStream Software Fees
Evidence and data. The interviewees explained that they paid annual fees for access to OneStream.
- Interviewees noted OneStream fees included a cost per user as well as the cost for whichever OneStream modules their organization selected.
- According to interviewees, OneStream provided their customers with access to more than 100 reusable solutions on its Solution Exchange to customize in their platform instance as needed. These included Account Reconciliations, Transaction Matching, People Planning, Capital Planning, SPM, and more.
- Each interviewee noted their organization received a dedicated Customer Success Manager from OneStream.
- Pricing may vary. Contact OneStream for additional details.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization has 102 users on OneStream. This includes 35 FP&A team members, 11 IT team members, 12 controllers, and 44 functional leaders and others who need access to the platform.
might have 0 users on OneStream, including 0 FP&A team members, 0 IT team members, 0 controllers, and additional functional leaders and others who need to access the platform.
- The composite organization opts to implement Sensible Machine Learning (ML) in Year 1. This cost is included in the annual cost of OneStream.
The annual cost of OneStream includes Sensible Machine Learning (ML) beginning in Year 1.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this cost will vary depending on:
- The number of OneStream users.
- When an organization opts to invest in the Sensible Machine Learning product.
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 $990,000.
For , this cost might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
OneStream Software Fees
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | OneStream users | CompositeScaled for | 102102 | 102102 | 102102 | 102102 | |
| E2 | OneStream license and Sensible Machine Learning fees | CompositeScaled for | $0 $0 | $379,000 $379,000 | $379,000 $379,000 | $379,000 $379,000 | |
| Et | OneStream license fees | E2 | $0 $0 | $379,000 $379,000 | $379,000 $379,000 | $379,000 $379,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
| Etr | OneStream license fees (risk-adjusted) | $0 $0 | $397,950 $397,950 | $397,950 $397,950 | $397,950 $397,950 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,193,850 $1,193,850 | Three-year present value: $989,643 $989,643 | ||||||
Implementation Costs
Evidence and data. Interviewees highlighted how easily they could expand the OneStream platform and integrate various solutions to support their evolving finance and business requirements. The ability to copy metadata from one instance to another also streamlined maintenance operations for their organizations.
- All interviewees shared that they opted to use one of several OneStream partners to support their implementation efforts. Their respective preferred partners worked with internal teams sharing the responsibilities as their organizations saw fit.
- While OneStream Dimensions helped streamline and automate metadata maintenance, the interviews shared that to get to a clean instance, the first phase of implementation took the longest and was the heaviest lift with an average timeline of nine months. A CIO of a utility services company shared that before their organization moved onto the OneStream platform, their internal team dedicated one month to clean the data to have a more seamless experience.
- All interviewees recommended a phased approach. Most often, the interviewees’ organizations implemented OneStream Financial Consolidation and Reporting in the first phase. Because the metadata was automatically carried over through the dimensions, the subsequent implementation phases were faster. For example, a manager of group reporting at a construction company shared that their first phase (Financial Consolidation and Planning) took nine months to complete, while the second phase (People Planning) took only six months to complete and required less internal resources to support the project.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization collaborates with a OneStream partner to support their implementation efforts. This initial cost is $500,000.
might collaborate with a OneStream partner to support implementation for a cost of $0.
- The composite organization opts for a phased approach. In phase one, it implements OneStream Close, Consolidation, Reporting, Sensible ML. In phase two, it implements Planning and in phase three, it implements People Planning and Account Reconciliation. Because the metadata is carried over, the phase-one implementation lasts nine months while phases two and three last three and five months, respectively.
might opt for a phased approach with the phase-one implementation lasting 0 months, phase two lasting 0 months, and phase three lasting 0 months.
- The composite organization’s phase-one implementation efforts is supported by a cross-functional team of eight internal finance and IT resources who dedicate 25% of their time to the project. Their fully burdened monthly rate is $14,457.
’s phase-one implementation effort is supported by 0 internal finance and IT resources who dedicate 25% of their time to the project.
- With the streamlined metadata in place, the composite organization relies on fewer internal resources for the subsequent implementations. In phase two, the composite organization needs four IT and finance personnel to support the implementation of OneStream Planning. They begin this work in Year 1 to prep for the deployment in Year 2. In phase three, to implement People Planning and Account Reconciliation, the composite organization needs two internal IT and finance resources to prep for deployment in Year 2 to launch in Year 3. For this effort, the internal cross-functional team dedicates 25% of their time.
In phase two, might need 0 IT and finance personnel to support the implementation and 0 for phase three.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this cost will vary depending on:
- The cost of the OneStream partner implementation support.
- The average length of implementation for OneStream solutions as well as the average length for subsequent phases.
- The number of IT and finance staff dedicated to supporting implementation efforts, the percentage of time they dedicate, and their respective salaries.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $912,000.
For , this cost might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Implementation Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | OneStream implementation partner engagement cost | CompositeScaled for | $500,000 $500,000 | |||
| F2 | Months spent on initial implementation | CompositeTEI case study | 99 | |||
| F3 | Internal finance and IT resources working on implementation | CompositeScaled for | 88 | |||
| F4 | Percentage of time dedicated by internal implementation resources | CompositeTEI case study | 25%25% | |||
| F5 | Fully burdened monthly rate for a finance and IT resource | CompositeTEI case study | $14,457 $14,457 | |||
| F6 | Subtotal: Internal implementation labor costs | F2*F3*F4*F5 | $260,226 $260,226 | $0 $0 | $0 $0 | $0 $0 |
| F7 | Months spent on secondary implementations | CompositeTEI case study | 33 | 55 | 00 | |
| F8 | Internal finance and IT resources working on secondary implementations (rounded) | Y1: F3*50% Y2: F3*25% |
44 | 22 | 00 | |
| F9 | Percentage of time dedicated by internal implementation resources | CompositeTEI case study | 25%25% | 25%25% | 0%0% | |
| F10 | Fully burdened monthly rate for a finance and IT resource | F5 | $14,457 $14,457 | $14,457 $14,457 | ||
| F11 | Subtotal: Phased implementation cost | F7*F8*F9*F10 | $0 $0 | $43,371 $43,371 | $36,143 $36,143 | $0 $0 |
| Ft | Implementation costs | F1+F6+F11 | $760,226 $760,226 | $43,371 $43,371 | $36,143 $36,143 | $0 $0 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Ftr | Implementation costs (risk-adjusted) | $836,249 $836,249 | $47,708 $47,708 | $39,757 $39,757 | $0 $0 | |
| Three-year total: $923,714 $923,714 | Three-year present value: $912,477 $912,477 | |||||
Ongoing Management And Training Costs
Evidence and data. The interviewees shared that in order to get the full value of the OneStream platform, they had their employees dedicate time to training.
While all the interviewees commented that OneStream was easy to use, they did share that it was imperative to dedicate time for training. Two interviewees shared that in order to keep up with ways to maximize the value of OneStream, they encouraged their employees to attend OneStream events, including OneStream Splash, and chat with members in the OneStream community to gain “hacks” and other ways to uncover insights that would help them drive business forward. This time was considered in how these interviewees calculated how much time their organizations dedicated to training.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
- The composite organization hires its OneStream implementation partner to support ongoing management of the OneStream platform, purchasing 200 hours per quarter. The OneStream partner’s professional services hourly rate is $250.
might hire its OneStream implementation partner to support ongoing management of the platform, purchasing 0 hours per quarter.
- While not a major lift, the composite organization relies on its internal IT team to support OneStream platform, needing 8 hours a month for ongoing management. The fully burdened hourly rate for an IT professional is $62.
might need 8 hours a month from its internal IT team to support ongoing management of OneStream platform.
- The composite organization has 102 OneStream users. The power users in FP&A (35), the controllers (12), and the IT team (11) initially dedicate two weeks to learning OneStream. In Year 1, these resources dedicate 20 hours each to refresh their learnings. In both Year 2 and Year 3, these resources dedicate a full week to training, which does include attending OneStream’s conferences and events when appropriate. The fully burdened hourly rate of these resources is $76.
has 0 OneStream users of which 0 are power users.
- The composite organization gives OneStream access to 44 other department and functional leaders. They spend 2 hours initially on training, and then do 1 hour of training each year. The fully burdened hourly rate for these other users is $65.
might give OneStream access to other department and functional leaders, who might require 2 initial hours of training and 1 additional hour of training per year after.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences. The impact of this benefit will vary depending on the number of users on OneStream, the length of time organizations dedicate to initial and subsequent training, and their employees average fully burdened hourly rates.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.4 million.
For , this cost might have a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of .
Ongoing Management And Training Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | Hours of OneStream partner professional services for ongoing management per quarter | InterviewsScaled for | 200200 | 200200 | 200200 | ||
| G2 | OneStream partner professional services hourly rate | Interviews | $250 $250 | $250 $250 | $250 $250 | ||
| G3 | Subtotal: Ongoing professional services costs | G1*G2*4 | $0 $0 | $200,000 $200,000 | $200,000 $200,000 | $200,000 $200,000 | |
| G4 | Hours of internal IT support for ongoing management | 8 hours*12 months | 9696 | 9696 | 9696 | ||
| G5 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an IT FTE | CompositeTEI case study | $62 $62 | $62 $62 | $62 $62 | ||
| G6 | Subtotal: Ongoing management cost for internal IT support | G4*G5 | $0 $0 | $5,952 $5,952 | $5,952 $5,952 | $5,952 $5,952 | |
| G7 | Finance, controller, and IT staff trained on OneStream | B1+B7+C1 | 5858 | 5858 | 5858 | 5858 | |
| G8 | Hours of training for finance, controller, and IT users | Interviews | 8080 | 2020 | 4040 | 4040 | |
| G9 | Blended burdened rate of finance, controllers and IT staff | CompositeTEI case study | $76 $76 | $76 $76 | $76 $76 | $76 $76 | |
| G10 | Other users trained on OneStream | E1-G7 | 4444 | 4444 | 4444 | 4444 | |
| G11 | Hours of training for other users | CompositeTEI case study | 22 | 11 | 11 | 11 | |
| G12 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of other users | CompositeTEI case study | $65 $65 | $65 $65 | $65 $65 | $65 $65 | |
| G13 | Subtotal: Training costs | (G7*G8*G9)+ (G10*G11*G12) | $358,360 $358,360 | $91,020 $91,020 | $179,180 $179,180 | $179,180 $179,180 | |
| Gt | Ongoing management and training costs | G3+G6+G13 | $358,360 $358,360 | $296,972 $296,972 | $385,132 $385,132 | $385,132 $385,132 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | ||||||
| Gtr | Ongoing management and training costs (risk-adjusted) | $394,196 $394,196 | $326,669 $326,669 | $423,645 $423,645 | $423,645 $423,645 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,568,156 $1,568,156 | Three-year present value: $1,359,579 $1,359,579 | ||||||
Consolidated Three-Year, Risk-Adjusted Metrics
Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)
Total costs Total benefits Cumulative net benefits Initial Year 1 Year 2 Year 3-
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 | ($1,230,445)($1,230,445) | ($772,327)($772,327) | ($861,353)($861,353) | ($821,595)($821,595) | ($3,685,720)($3,685,720) | ($3,261,699)($3,261,699) |
| Total benefits | $0 $0 | $2,900,466 $2,900,466 | $3,627,006 $3,627,006 | $4,303,866 $4,303,866 | $10,831,337 $10,831,337 | $8,867,870 $8,867,870 |
| Net benefits | ($1,230,445)($1,230,445) | $2,128,138 $2,128,138 | $2,765,653 $2,765,653 | $3,482,270 $3,482,270 | $7,145,617 $7,145,617 | $5,606,171 $5,606,171 |
| ROI | 172%172% | |||||
| Payback | 7 months7 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.
2 Source: Navigate The Requirements Of The CSRD, Forrester Research, Inc., October 11, 2023.
3 Source: Follow The Money: DOP Planning And Analytics Redefines Enterprise Performance Management, Forrester Research, Inc., March 1, 2021.
4 Source: Navigate The Requirements Of The CSRD, Forrester Research, Inc., October 11, 2023.
PDF 