Meeting: Rakesh Zaveri - Finance Director Interview¶

Date: 2025-12-01 Attendee: Rakesh Zaveri (RZ) - Finance Director (Part-time) Interviewer: TD (Tom) Location: Remote Working Pattern: Part-time (2 days per week) Department: Finance & Accounting Team: Rakesh (FD, 2 days/week) + Heather (Accountant, full-time)

Overview¶

Rakesh is the part-time Finance Director at EF, working 2 days per week alongside full-time accountant Heather. He oversees all financial operations, accounting, payroll, and technology infrastructure. The finance team manages accounts for 2,000 clients using Acturis as the accounting platform (despite its limitations) to avoid data transfer overhead. Rakesh has a strong technology background and has implemented automation solutions at larger organizations, but believes EF's small scale (15 people) doesn't justify significant automation investment for most finance processes. His primary concern is data consistency and process adherence across the organization, not technology gaps.

Current Workflow & Tools¶

Accounting Platform¶

Acturis for Everything: - Previously used separate accounting software - Switched to Acturis accounting module despite it being "not great" - Rationale: Avoid data transfer overhead between systems - Sales invoicing in Acturis automatically populates accounting side - No manual data transfer needed - "It does the job" for company of this size

What Acturis Handles Well: - Client money rules (FCA regulated) - Separation of client account vs. office account - Commission reconciliation - Insurer payment tracking - Monthly reports for fund transfers

Limitations: - Accounting module "not great" but improving since 2015/2016 - Some issues remain unsolved - Not worth investing in finding solutions given small benefit

Client Money Rules (FCA Compliance)¶

Critical regulatory requirement: - Cannot pay insurers until client has paid EF - Cannot use one client's money for another client - Two separate bank accounts: Client Account and Office Account - Can only mix money when taking commission - Monthly reconciliation required

How it works: 1. Client pays premium → goes to Client Account 2. EF deducts commission, pays net amount to insurer 3. Acturis tracks creditors and payment obligations 4. Monthly bulk payments to insurers (not one-by-one) 5. End of month: reconcile accounts, transfer commission to Office Account

Example: - 100% premium received from client - 80% paid to insurer (net) - 20% commission - Commission sits in Client Account until monthly transfer - One bulk transfer per month (not 2,000 individual transfers)

Quote: "The software does all of that for us. So that's quite handy."

Payment Operations¶

Insurer Payments: - Two payment runs per month (middle and end of month) - Batch payments instead of one-by-one - Acturis generates payment registers - Manual creation of payment files - NatWest bank uploads via template - Reconciliation with insurer statements

Special Cases: - Emergency payments if insurer threatening to lapse policy - Generally try to batch to avoid errors - "We try to keep it simple"

Commission Transfer: - One transfer per month from Client Account to Office Account - End-of-month reconciliation - Report shows total commission earned - Single bulk transfer (not 2,000 individual transfers)

Expenses Management¶

Current Process: - Staff submit expenses on spreadsheet - Finance team manually types into Acturis - Only 3-4 people submit expenses regularly - Others submit occasionally (1-2 per month) - Total: 4-5 expense submissions per month maximum

Why Not Automated: - Volume too low (4-5 people vs. 15 staff) - Cost of automation not justified - Manual entry acceptable for this scale

Quote: "For four, five people it doesn't make sense."

Purchase Invoices¶

Current Process: - Manual posting into Acturis - Very small volume (15-person overhead) - Acturis doesn't support invoice upload/OCR currently

Rakesh's Experience with OCR: - At previous organization: 2,000 invoices/month - Implemented DocuWare with OCR reader - Emails auto-uploaded, system created postings automatically - Someone checked, then posted - But for EF: "If you've got volume it makes sense. But here it just doesn't make sense."

Cost-benefit threshold: - Would need to double or triple in size before automation justified - Not enough volume currently

Payroll¶

Outsourced to Moore Kingston Smith:

Rakesh's process: 1. Collects pay data (salaries + quarterly commissions) 2. Fills in spreadsheet 3. Uploads to Moore Kingston Smith payroll department 4. Receives payslips back (automated portal for staff) 5. Copies reports into custom spreadsheets 6. Generates journals for accounting system (one journal per month) 7. Creates BACS file from payroll data 8. Uploads to NatWest bank template 9. System creates payment automatically

Staff Access: - Portal login for each employee - Self-service for payslips, P60s, P11Ds - No manual payslip distribution

Security Consideration: - Only Rakesh handles payroll (confidential salary data) - Cannot delegate to Heather - "I do all of that myself"

Custom Spreadsheets: - Rakesh built templates for data transformation - Copy-paste from payroll reports → journals - Copy-paste → BACS upload file - No manual typing into bank system - Monthly recurring process

Day-to-Day Finance Operations¶

Heather's Responsibilities (Full-time Accountant): - All transactional postings - Bank reconciliation - Client payment allocation in Acturis - Payment processing - Day-to-day accounting entries

Rakesh's Responsibilities (Part-time, 2 days/week): - Payroll management - Strategic oversight - Compliance - System administration - Purchase invoices - Management reporting

Team Structure: - Just 2 people for 15-person company, 2,000 clients - "For 15 people you don't need more than... we don't need... yeah."

Debt Chasing Process¶

Monday Morning Debt Meeting¶

Weekly Ritual: - Part of broader Monday team meeting - Finance section run by Rakesh - Reviews outstanding debts and payment status

Friday Preparation: - Heather sends out outstanding debtors list (mid-Friday afternoon) - Shows number of days outstanding - Gives account handlers afternoon + weekend to review - Reality: "Probably they're not doing because on a Monday morning it's like, 'Oh, I'll deal with that today.'"

Debt Categories¶

Meeting Focus: - Over 30 days: Full discussion in meeting - 25-30 days: On list, handlers review themselves - Under 25 days: Listed but not discussed

Acturis Report: - Outstanding debtors report generated from Acturis - Exported to spreadsheet - "Tidied up a little bit" - Acturis reports "aren't that great" - Template format gets updated weekly

Debt Management Philosophy¶

Leverage: - "If they don't pay us, we're not going to... we're not going to lose out. I mean obviously we lose out the commission but they're not going to have insurance cover." - Can force payment by threat of lapsing policy - "If they don't, then we just lapse it."

Not a Major Problem: - "Our debts aren't that bad" - Some regular bad payers - Generally manageable

Insurer Payment Deadlines¶

Varies by Insurer: - Some want money immediately - Some give 60-70 days - Others strict: 14-30 days - "It all depends on each insurer"

EF's Approach: - "Try to push it as far as we can to make sure that the client pays" - Balance between insurer deadlines and client collection - Ultimate risk: policy lapse if payment not received

Quote: "We will try to push it as far as we can to make sure that the client pays. But sometimes in the end you just have to, um, you know... let it go and say, right, it's going to lapse and just tell the client that they've got no insurance."

Technology Infrastructure¶

IT Support & Hardware¶

Hitachi (Acturis Support Company): - Manages all infrastructure - All servers are virtual (no on-premise hardware) - Cloud-based infrastructure

Network & Security¶

Office WiFi: - EF has separate WiFi from building - Reason: Acturis requires unique IP address - Cannot share building's general WiFi (would give whole building same IP) - Firewall in building comms cupboard routes to EF WiFi

Remote Access: - Staff VPN into firewall when working from home - Masks IP address to appear as office connection - Required to access Acturis remotely

Acturis License Options: - Can pay extra for laptop-specific licenses - Each laptop gets unique Acturis access - EF chose not to: Security risk if laptop stolen - Client data could be compromised - Staff save passwords in browsers (Chrome, etc.) - "Having a password has become quite useless now"

Quote: "If you lose a laptop then the secur... security of client data and all that sort of stuff could be compromised."

Microsoft 365 & Cloud Storage¶

Email & Storage: - Everything on Microsoft OneDrive - All emails synced to cloud - Not instantaneous but regular sync - Backup copy on laptops - Each person has own OneDrive - Full Microsoft Office suite

File Storage: - "Everything is stored in the cloud" - OneDrive as primary backup - Local copies sync regularly

File Size & Storage Limitations¶

Acturis File Size Limits¶

Current Limits: - 10MB per email/attachment in Acturis - Can receive larger files via regular email - Storage costs increase with higher limits

Laura's Claims Challenge: - Claims emails often have multiple large attachments (photos, videos) - Videos often too large for Acturis - Laura mentioned this as pain point

Rakesh's Perspective: - Could increase limits, but is it worthwhile? - "How often do we get that many?" - Cost-benefit question

OneDrive Alternative (TD's Suggestion)¶

TD Proposed: - Extract large images from emails - Store in OneDrive instead of Acturis - Still secure and available - Avoid expensive Acturis storage

Rakesh's Concern: - "The problem is putting in the OneDrive is then trying to find afterwards" - Need centralized organization - Requires consistent process across team - Risk: Different people, different approaches - "Somebody else doing claims while, say, Laura is on holiday, they'll do their own thing and before you know it you've got a complete shambles."

Key Insight: Storage location less important than process consistency

Data Consistency & Process Adherence¶

Primary Technology Concern¶

Not about tools, but about consistency:

Quote: "My biggest concern, and it always has been, is consistency of data. Because every person at our front end, even though we've got processes, doesn't always follow the processes."

Examples of Inconsistency: 1. Task management: Some use Acturis tasks, others use spreadsheets 2. Email filing: Some use reference numbers, others remove them 3. Subject lines: Some change for client aesthetics vs. filing efficiency 4. Data completeness: Variable quality of Acturis data entry

Acturis File Audit Intelligence¶

New Tool Coming: - Acturis releasing "audit intelligence" add-on - EF about to implement it - Course held while Rakesh on leave - Tommy and Martin attended - Decision made to proceed

Purpose: - Identify individuals doing "bare minimum" to update database - "Pick out people and make them more... sort of like, 'You're not doing these things which are in our processes.'" - Management tool for process enforcement

Rakesh's Uncertainty: - Hasn't seen it yet - Doesn't know how intelligence works - Hopes it will improve consistency

Historical Context: - Used to have manual file checking - Sample files reviewed for FCA compliance - Now focusing more on data consistency - "If we... you know... data col... um, sort of collecting on our Acturis platform, I think consistency would be a lot more useful."

Email Filing Example¶

Acturis Feature: - Can upload emails from Outlook directly to Acturis - Uses unique reference numbers in subject line - Auto-files to correct client/policy if number present - "You don't have to do the filing, you just kind of upload it and it just packs it into the right place."

Adoption Problems:

Problem 1: Aesthetic Concerns - Some people remove reference numbers before sending - Think numbers "don't look good for the client" - Rakesh: "It's a number. I mean, what difference does it make to the client if there's a reference number up there?"

Problem 2: Subject Line Changes - Put client name in subject (internal reference) - But clients see their own name when receiving email - Should see renewal/notification type instead - Tension between internal filing and external appearance

Result: - Without reference number, manual filing required - "Blind filing" - software can't auto-match - More time spent by staff - "That makes it harder because then they have to take more time to file the... file in place. Or what normally happens is, 'Oh it's in my inbox.'"

Quote: "There's some people who don't... don't um... see the benefit of it. So they... they remove it. So that makes it harder because then they have to take more time to file the... file in place."

Task Management Inconsistency¶

TD's Observation: - Laura (Claims) uses Acturis task management exclusively - Some account handlers don't use it at all - They use personal spreadsheets instead - "Quicker and easier" but not visible to others

Rakesh's Management Concern: - "From a management point of view, it becomes difficult to manage it" - Can't find information in Acturis when people use spreadsheets - Visibility problem for oversight

Acturis Capabilities: - Has "quite a lot of facilities" - Email upload from Outlook - Task management - Reference number auto-filing - But not everyone uses them

Induction & Training¶

No Formal Induction Process¶

TD's Question: How do you handle inductions for new account handlers?

Rakesh's Answer: - Legal/Admin: Rakesh handles contracts, email setup, laptop provision - Acturis Training: "Most people have come from somewhere that they've used Acturis" (common software) - Formal Process: "There is no real induction process" - Reason: "Nobody's got the time to train anyone" - Learning Method: "You just kind of learn by osmosis" - asking questions as you go

Quote: "There should be one, but somebody's gotta then spend time saying what we do."

Problems with No Training¶

Problem 1: Brings Bad Habits - New hires used Acturis elsewhere - "They bring their own bad habits" - "They carry on doing what they're doing from elsewhere"

Problem 2: Different Configurations - Acturis is "pretty big software that can be used in lots of different ways" - "The way that people use it from other organizations may not fit the way you do it here"

TD's Observation: Even experienced Acturis users may not use it the way EF needs them to

Rakesh: "Exactly. Yeah."

Time Constraint Reality¶

Why No Training: - Small team (15 people) - No dedicated training resource - Everyone busy with operational work - Can't spare time to create/deliver training - Documentation doesn't exist (or isn't maintained)

Quote: "If nobody reviews that um... Acturis, then obviously there's more time to be spent on them."

Automation Opportunities Discussed¶

What Could Be Automated¶

TD Asked: Could Acturis send automated reminder emails at set intervals for debt chasing?

Rakesh's Response: - Doesn't know if Acturis has automated email capability - Templates exist, but not sure about scheduled/triggered emails - Doesn't use front-end (sales side) so unfamiliar with functionality - Never seen a "push button" routine for statements - Monthly statements might be excessive anyway (most clients have one item)

Quote: "I'm not quite sure of the functionality of Acturis on the front end because I don't use it."

Spreadsheet-to-Report Automation¶

Current Process: - Export Acturis report - Import to Excel template - "Tidy up" formatting - Could possibly be automated further

Rakesh's View: - Acknowledges possible automation - Hasn't pursued it - Not urgent priority

Scale Threshold for Automation¶

Clear Pattern in Rakesh's Responses:

Examples Given: - Expenses: 4-5 people/month - Not worth automating - Purchase invoices: Small overhead - Not worth automating - Previous org with 2,000 invoices/month: Worth automating (implemented OCR)

Rule of Thumb: - Current size: 15 people, small transaction volumes - Would need to "double or triple in size" before automation justified - Cost vs. benefit doesn't work at current scale

Quote: "I mean if it were bigger than slightly different, then I'd think about maybe automating our expenses. But again, like for four, five people it doesn't make sense."

Strategic Insights¶

Finance Operations Already Optimized for Scale¶

Key Finding: Unlike the account handling side, finance operations are well-suited to current scale: - 2 people handle 15 staff, 2,000 clients - Acturis integration eliminates data transfer - Payroll outsourced efficiently - Payment processes batched sensibly - Minimal manual overhead

Rakesh's Assessment: - "Pretty much where we are until... if we had probably double, maybe... maybe double or triple in size" - No pressing need for finance automation - Current processes sustainable

Contrast with Account Handling¶

Finance Side (Rakesh's View): - Appropriate for scale - Cost-effective - Not broken, doesn't need fixing - Will reconsider if company doubles/triples

Account Handling Side (From Other Interviews): - Significant pain points (renewal spreadsheets, portal data entry, email processing) - Time waste on repetitive tasks - Opportunities for automation even at current scale - Skills-task misalignment (sales people doing admin)

Different Economics: - Finance: Small number of regular processes, low volume - Operations: High-touch, high-volume, relationship-critical

Client Money Rules Shape Everything¶

Critical Constraint: - FCA regulation on client money separation - Cannot mix funds - Must track individual client payments and insurer obligations - Monthly reconciliation required - Acturis chosen specifically for this capability

Implication: - Any automation must preserve client money rules compliance - Acturis integration non-negotiable - Can't replace accounting system easily - Industry-specific compliance requirement

Consistency > Technology¶

Most Important Finding from This Interview:

Technology is adequate. Process adherence is the problem.

Quote: "My biggest concern, and it always has been, is consistency of data."

Evidence: 1. Acturis has features people don't use (task manager, email filing) 2. People remove reference numbers for aesthetic reasons 3. No formal training/induction 4. "Learn by osmosis" means no standardization 5. Different people bring different habits from previous jobs 6. Management visibility reduced by inconsistent tool usage

Hope for Solution: - Acturis file audit intelligence tool - May enforce process compliance - Data-driven identification of non-compliance - But Rakesh hasn't seen it yet, uncertain of effectiveness

The "No Time for Training" Problem¶

Chicken-and-Egg Issue: - No time to train because everyone busy - Everyone busy partly because processes inconsistent - Inconsistent processes because no training - New hires bring external habits, perpetuating inconsistency

Impact: - Different Acturis usage patterns across team - Spreadsheet workarounds instead of Acturis features - Management visibility gaps - Data quality issues

Not Solved by Technology: - More tools won't help - Need process documentation - Need time investment in training - Need enforcement/accountability

OneDrive Storage: Process > Platform¶

TD's Suggestion: Use OneDrive for large claims attachments

Rakesh's Response: Not about the storage platform, about consistent organization

Key Concern: "Somebody else doing claims while, say, Laura is on holiday, they'll do their own thing and before you know it you've got a complete shambles."

Insight: - Laura's absence risk (single point of failure) - Backup person won't follow same process - Need standardized folder structure/naming - Need documentation - Same problem as Acturis consistency issue

Parallel to Other Findings: - Renewals: Excel spreadsheets inconsistent with Acturis - Email filing: Some use reference numbers, some don't - Task management: Some use Acturis, some use personal methods - Pattern: Individual autonomy > organizational consistency

Technology Recommendations (Implied)¶

Low Priority for Finance Automation¶

Based on Rakesh's Assessment: - Finance processes already efficient for scale - Manual work manageable (expenses, purchase invoices) - Outsourcing working well (payroll) - Acturis accounting adequate despite limitations - Cost-benefit doesn't justify automation investment

Exception: Debt Chasing - Already flagged by TH as improvement opportunity - 5-10 minutes every Monday meeting - Automated reminders could save time - But: "Debts aren't that bad" per Rakesh - May not be highest priority despite TH's mention

High Priority: Process Documentation & Training¶

Not Technology Solution: - Document standard processes for key workflows - Create Acturis usage guidelines specific to EF - Formal induction training program - Explain WHY processes matter (e.g., reference numbers enable auto-filing) - Regular refresher training - Process compliance monitoring

Would Address: - Data consistency issues (Rakesh's #1 concern) - Management visibility problems - Onboarding inefficiency - "Bad habits" from external hires - Tool underutilization (task manager, email filing)

Quote Supporting This: "There should be one [induction process], but somebody's gotta then spend time saying what we do."

Medium Priority: Acturis Audit Intelligence¶

Already Decided: - EF purchasing Acturis file audit intelligence - Tommy and Martin attended training - Implementation pending

Rakesh's Hope: - Will identify process non-compliance - Make people accountable - Improve data consistency

TD's Role: - Could support implementation - Help define what consistency looks like - Complement with documentation/training - Ensure tool adopted effectively (not ignored like other features)

OneDrive Claims Storage (If Pursued)¶

Prerequisites: - Define standard folder structure - Document naming conventions - Create step-by-step process - Train Laura AND backup person - Test during Laura's absence - Monitor compliance

Without Prerequisites: - Will create "complete shambles" (Rakesh's words) - Different organization per person - Findability problems - Same issue as current Acturis inconsistency

Follow-Up Questions¶

Action Items¶

Initial Discovery with TH - Priority #6: Debt Chasing identified
Acturis Technical Discovery - API capabilities
Laura Harris Interview - File size limits pain point, claims process
Lucy Leech Interview - Excel spreadsheet workflow, Acturis underutilization
Marilyn Bothello Interview - Process innovation, inconsistent feature adoption
JL Interview - HNW workflow

Comparison with Other Interviews¶

Unique Insights from Rakesh¶

Finance Perspective: - First interview with finance/accounting view - Different scale considerations (2,000 clients, small transaction volume) - Client money rules as design constraint - Cost-benefit threshold for automation clearly articulated - Technology infrastructure and security considerations

Consistent Themes Across Interviews¶

Data Consistency Issues: - Rakesh: "Consistency of data" is #1 concern - Lucy: Excel-Acturis disconnection, manual reconciliation - Marilyn: Some use features, some don't ("I don't think a lot of people in the company do this step") - Laura: Successfully uses task manager unlike others - JL: Insurer portal data entry inconsistency

Acturis Underutilization: - Rakesh: Email filing reference numbers removed for aesthetics, task manager ignored - Lucy: Templates generic and outdated, task manager unused - Marilyn: "Invite to Client" feature used by her but not widely adopted - Laura: Exception - uses task manager religiously

Training & Onboarding Gap: - Rakesh: "No real induction process... learn by osmosis" - Marilyn: Brought innovations from previous role, but also habits - Pattern: Individual knowledge not systematized/shared

Scale Considerations¶

Finance Operations (Rakesh): - 15 people = too small for most automation - "Double or triple" in size needed - Current processes sustainable

Account Handling (Lucy, Marilyn, JL, Laura): - Pain points exist even at current scale - Repetitive work justifies automation - Time savings would enable growth/relationship building - Different economics than finance

Key Difference: - Finance: Low-volume, regular processes - Operations: High-volume, repetitive, relationship-critical

Key Quotes¶

"My biggest concern, and it always has been, is consistency of data. Because every person at our front end, even though we've got processes, doesn't always follow the processes." On primary technology challenge

"There is no real induction process. Um, because nobody's got the time to train anyone. Um, and and you just kind of learn by osmosis." On training and onboarding

"They bring their own bad habits and um... and they carry on doing what they're doing from elsewhere." On new hires with Acturis experience

"Somebody else doing claims while, say, Laura is on holiday, they'll do their own thing and before you know it you've got a complete shambles." On consistency importance for backup coverage

"If you've got volume it makes sense. But here it just doesn't make sense." On automation cost-benefit for small companies

"It's a number. I mean, what difference does it make to the client if there's a reference number up there?" On aesthetic concerns preventing efficient email filing

"From a management point of view, it becomes difficult to manage it. Um, because, you know, then you have to... they've got a spreadsheet and when you go to Acturis you can't find anything." On impact of inconsistent tool usage

"The software does all of that for us. So that's quite handy." On Acturis handling of client money rules

"Having a password has become quite useless now because people just save it on the... the Google or whatever Chrome or whatever they're using." On laptop security challenges

Consultant Observations¶

Rakesh's Expertise: - Strong technology background - Implemented automation at larger organizations (DocuWare OCR example) - Understands cost-benefit analysis clearly - Pragmatic about scale considerations - Systems thinking evident

Communication Style: - Matter-of-fact and analytical - Realistic about constraints - Not defensive about limitations - Open about lack of formal processes - Comfortable admitting uncertainty (e.g., Acturis front-end features)

Technology Philosophy: - Automation must justify cost - Volume threshold exists - "Good enough" acceptable for small scale - Integration/data transfer avoidance valued highly - Compliance requirements drive decisions

Interesting Contrast: - Can implement sophisticated solutions (OCR, payroll automation) - Chooses not to at EF due to scale - Sophisticated about when NOT to automate - "We're probably pretty much where we are"

Pain Point Perspective: - Not technology gaps - Process adherence and consistency - Training/documentation deficit - Management visibility - Individual autonomy vs. organizational needs

Limited Scope: - Part-time (2 days/week) - Doesn't use Acturis front-end - Focused on accounting/finance side - May not see full picture of operational pain points - But: sees consequences (inconsistent data, management problems)

Strategic Assessment¶

Finance Operations: Low Automation Priority¶

Evidence: - 2-person team adequate for current scale - Processes efficient and sustainable - Outsourcing working well (payroll, IT) - Manual work low-volume and manageable - Acturis integration prevents data transfer overhead - Cost-benefit doesn't justify automation investment

Recommendation: - Maintain current finance operations - Revisit if company doubles/triples in size - Focus technology investment on operations side (renewals, claims, new business)

Exception: - Debt chasing automation might still be worthwhile - Not for time savings, but for consistency and client experience - Could reduce Monday meeting discussion time - Proactive reminders better than reactive chasing

Process Consistency: Highest Priority¶

Evidence: - Rakesh's #1 concern - Impacts data quality, management visibility, efficiency - No formal training/onboarding - Individual habits vary widely - Features exist but not adopted consistently - "Learn by osmosis" perpetuates inconsistency

Root Causes: 1. No time for training (everyone busy) 2. No documentation of EF-specific processes 3. New hires bring external habits 4. No enforcement/accountability 5. Management can't see non-compliance easily

Recommendations: 1. Process Documentation: Document standard workflows, Acturis usage guidelines 2. Formal Induction: Even basic training better than osmosis 3. Acturis Audit Intelligence: Implement effectively, use data to drive compliance 4. Regular Refreshers: Not just onboarding, but ongoing reinforcement 5. Explain Why: Help staff understand benefits (e.g., auto-filing saves their time)

Impact: - Better data quality - Management visibility - Easier backup coverage - Foundation for future automation - Reduced firefighting/inefficiency

Training Time Investment¶

Current State: - "Nobody's got the time to train anyone" - Everyone busy with operations - No training capacity

Chicken-and-Egg: - Busy partly because inconsistent processes - Inconsistent processes because no training - No training because too busy

Breaking the Cycle: - Upfront time investment in documentation - Formal induction program (even if brief) - Could free up time through consistency - ROI from reduced management overhead - Easier scaling when business grows

Recommendation: - Treat as project, not ongoing overhead - Document once, use repeatedly - Could be part of TD's deliverables - Train-the-trainer approach - Video/written guides for self-service

Acturis Audit Intelligence¶

Opportunity: - EF already purchasing - Tommy and Martin trained - Implementation pending

Success Factors: 1. Clear metrics defined (what is "good" data quality?) 2. Regular review of findings 3. Non-punitive approach (coaching not punishment) 4. Tied to process documentation (show people HOW to comply) 5. Management commitment to follow-through

Risk: - Another tool that gets ignored - Findings without action - Resistance to monitoring - "We've always done it this way"

TD's Role: - Support implementation - Help interpret findings - Complement with training/documentation - Ensure adoption

Laura's Claims Process Risk¶

Rakesh Highlighted: - OneDrive storage needs consistent process - Backup person won't follow Laura's method - "Complete shambles" risk

Parallels Other Findings: - Laura is sole claims handler (part-time) - Currently 95 claims (vs. 70 comfortable) - No documented backup process - Uses task manager unlike others - What happens during Laura's absence?

Recommendation: - Document Laura's claims workflow - Train backup handler - Test backup process - Before implementing new tools (OneDrive storage) - Same pattern as other roles - consistency critical

Technology vs. Process Balance¶

Key Insight from This Interview:

Can't fix process problems with technology alone.

Examples: - Acturis has email filing → people remove reference numbers - Acturis has task manager → people use spreadsheets instead - Could add OneDrive storage → without process, creates chaos - Could automate debt reminders → if inconsistent follow-through, won't help

Implication for Recommendations: - Technology solutions must include process component - Training/documentation as important as tools - Adoption planning critical - Change management not just technical implementation

Balance: - Some technology improvements worthwhile (renewals, claims automation) - But must include process standardization - Documentation, training, compliance monitoring - Can't skip the "people" part

Final Assessment¶

Rakesh's interview reveals that finance operations are not the priority for automation, but his insights about process consistency are critical for ALL recommendations.

Finance Side: Status Quo Acceptable¶

✅ Efficient for scale - 2 people manage well ✅ Cost-benefit clear - automation not justified at 15-person size ✅ Integration smart - Acturis accounting avoids data transfer ✅ Outsourcing working - payroll handled effectively ✅ Compliance managed - client money rules properly handled

Recommendation: Maintain current finance processes, focus technology investment elsewhere

Operations Side: Technology + Process¶

Technology opportunities remain valid: - Claims email automation (Laura's attachment processing) - Renewals process improvements (portal automation, quote comparison) - Excel-Acturis synchronization - New business response automation (Quote Searcher)

But must include process components: - Documentation of standard workflows - Training on tools and WHY they matter - Consistency monitoring (Acturis audit intelligence) - Backup processes for key roles - Change management and adoption planning

Highest ROI: Process Consistency¶

Rakesh's #1 concern is organizational, not technical.

Addressing it enables: - Better data quality for any AI/automation - Management visibility and control - Easier backup coverage (Laura, others) - Foundation for scaling - Reduced inefficiency from workarounds

Deliverable Suggestion: - Include process documentation in final report - Not just "what to automate" but "how to standardize" - Training program outline - Acturis audit intelligence implementation support - Change management recommendations

Quote to Remember:

"My biggest concern, and it always has been, is consistency of data. Because every person at our front end, even though we've got processes, doesn't always follow the processes."

This interview shifts the project focus from pure technology to technology + process + training.