Ramya Krishnaganth: FP&A is deeply rooted and embedded in the business. It is more like a very active nervous system for the organization, ultimately working to make people’s lives easier. 

Paul Barnhurst: Ramya Krishnaganth is the founder and CEO of UVID Consulting, where she helps businesses boost performance by simplifying and automating budgeting, forecasting, and reporting. Ramya empowers leaders to make faster, data-driven decisions. Why do you think so many companies struggle with their data? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: There are some common reasons. It is a combination of people, process, and technology, which impacts data quality, or even the availability of data itself. 

Paul Barnhurst: What is the number one technical skill that FP&A professionals should master? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: In technical terms, we can call it data transformation. Communication is the biggest skill that is going to help you. If you are dealing with large enterprise customers, we are driven by a lot of data policies and data requirements. 

Paul Barnhurst: But is data the real problem? What do you advise people to figure that out? 

Paul Barnhurst: This week’s episode is brought to you by the Corporate Finance Institute, CFI, the global leader in online corporate finance training and certifications. With CFI’s FMVA program, you will learn how to build three-statement models, perform DCF and comparable valuation, forecasting, and presenting insights with clarity—the exact skills you need to move your career forward. Right now, you can get 30% off when you sign up. Visit corporatefinanceinstitute.com. Thanks to CFI for sponsoring this episode. 

Paul Barnhurst: Hello everyone. Welcome to FP&A Tomorrow, where we delve into the world of financial planning and analysis, examining its current state and future prospects. I am your host, Paul Barnhurst, aka the FP&A Guy, and I will be guiding you through the evolving landscape of FP&A. Each week, we are joined by thought leaders, industry experts, and practitioners who share their insights and experiences, helping us navigate today’s complexities and tomorrow’s uncertainties. Whether you are a seasoned professional or just starting your journey, this show has something for everyone. This week, I am thrilled to welcome Ramya to the show. Ramya, welcome to the show. 

Ramya Krishnaganth: Thank you, Paul. Thank you for having me here. 

Paul Barnhurst: Really excited to have you. Let me share a little bit about Ramya, and then we will jump into the questions. Ramya Krishnaganth, founder of UVID Consulting, is an experienced leader in business and finance technology, helping companies improve performance through smarter processes and technology. She specializes in streamlining and automating budgeting, forecasting, and reporting, enabling leadership teams to make faster, data-driven decisions. With experience across global enterprises and high-growth businesses, she combines deep financial expertise with practical technical solutions. She holds an executive MBA from Wharton and professional degrees in chartered and cost accounting from India. Outside of work, she enjoys a variety of interests, including listening to holistic life podcasts, such as FP&A Tomorrow, and competing with her kids in board games, amongst others. Again, welcome to the show. I am really excited to get to chat with you today. So, here is the question I always like to start with: In your mind, what does great FP&A look like? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: This is always a question, right? Whenever we say FP&A, the conversation revolves around the numbers, the difficulty in looking at the data, and all of those challenges. But for me, and for many others as well, FP&A is more than the numbers. It is deeply rooted and embedded in the business. The numbers are just the tool and the way you see the business. How are you seeing the numbers? What is the business narrative you are seeing behind the numbers, and how are you connecting it to different departments? That is FP&A. There are many characteristics to great FP&A, such as how agile you are and how quickly you can answer questions. It is more like a very active central nervous system in our body. It keeps track of what is going on, understands the signals, converts them into actionable information, and helps you stay ahead of the competition. Is there a threat? Should we fight or take flight? That is what we call scenario analysis. It is an active nervous system for the organization. That is how I would define FP&A.  

Paul Barnhurst: I like that. I haven’t heard anyone use that analogy of the nervous center that activates and helps manage the business. I think that is a great comparison, so thank you for sharing that. Can you think of an example, maybe one you have seen or been involved in during your career, where you saw great FP&A in action?  

Ramya Krishnaganth: There are many, but I will talk about one of my recent favorites. This was with an OEM manufacturer in the semiconductor industry. The CFO decided that over the next one or two years, they were going to streamline all company operations and gain better control over costs, which in turn would be reflected in their margins. The CFO was a big fan of variable costs. In that industry, he strongly believed in managing variable costs. They started aligning everything through that lens. They separated material costs because those are largely dictated by market pricing and out of their control. Instead, they looked at the value-add, specifically the direct labor cost. They compared their direct labor percentage to the industry average and started driving questions: Why is our percentage high? Are we spending more? Are we less efficient in terms of productivity? Or, if it is lower, are we squeezing too much out of our people? Do we need to bring in more headcount? He started looking at the entire business from this perspective. He linked every line of the P&L to the variable cost objective to streamline operations and reduce costs. He took one lever for that period to bring everything under control, which was amazing. This led to proactive discussions with department heads regarding automation, restructuring the chart of accounts, and linking those levers to production and labor efficiency metrics. The FP&A team was able to have highly productive conversations, offering insights on what the business should be looking at. This is a classic example of FP&A proactively engaging with the business. 

Paul Barnhurst: Thank you. I appreciate you sharing that. I love how he went through it methodically, understood it, and figured out what levers to pull to impact it. That is a great example of being analytical and process-driven to accomplish a goal. During your career, you have spent a lot of time on financial transformations. What is it that you like about working on transformations and big projects like that? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: It goes back to the excitement I showed in the previous question. FP&A, as part of financial transformation, is a rare and unique area within finance where the numbers are directly connected to strategy. The numbers reflect how your business operates and impact real-time decision-making. During the pandemic, I was working with an event management company. Due to capacity restrictions, they had to decide within a week whether to split a scheduled show across two different weekends or postpone it entirely to a later date. The FP&A team was able to turn around this scenario analysis within a day. Management had the opportunity to review different assumptions, poke holes in the data, and weigh financial and non-financial factors, like the guest experience. Ultimately, they decided to postpone the event so they could do it justice. Being part of that real-time decision-making process is exactly what excites me. Furthermore, every customer, every industry, and every leader is completely different. No two FP&A transformations are the same. That constant change keeps me interested. 

Paul Barnhurst: I took two things away from that. One, the challenge is always changing, so you don’t feel like you are doing the same thing day after day. And the other is seeing the real-world benefit of the transformation, whether it’s technology or process, and seeing how it allows them to make better business decisions. 

Ramya Krishnaganth: Right. One aspect is for the business, Paul, but the other is seeing how it actually makes somebody’s life easier. When people on the FP&A team feel relieved after having this transformation in place, that human aspect warms my heart. 

Paul Barnhurst: I really appreciate you adding that human aspect. As we talk about transformations, one of the big areas every company struggles with is data. Nobody’s data seems to be perfect. Why do you think so many companies struggle with their data? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: There are some common reasons. We often blame legacy technology that cannot keep up with fast-changing business needs. But is that the only reason? Not necessarily. There are often discrete, siloed processes. For example, the way sales looks at revenue and the way finance looks at revenue might be completely different. They have their own definitions and structures. Another part of it is culture and mindset. Sometimes people hoard information because they feel more secure or powerful controlling it. It is always a composite problem involving people, processes, and technology, which impacts data quality and availability. 

Paul Barnhurst: I appreciate that it is rarely just one issue. As you go into companies, is it usually a combination of all three, or do you sometimes see where it is strictly a technology, process, or people issue? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: It is almost always a combination. The only question is the percentage split between them. Most of the time, the root of the problem is the process. It could be something simple like who is creating the customer structure and following through on it. Then there are people problems, like entering data with missing fields or incorrect punctuation. Then there is technology. Depending on the stage they are at, they might have basic technology but lack the advanced systems needed to support their current growth level. It is always a composite problem. What is your experience, Paul? 

Paul Barnhurst: I would agree. I have been at companies where I thought it was mostly technology because their systems were incredibly outdated. But ultimately, all three elements were present. Even with good people and processes, I couldn’t do what was needed due to technical challenges. However, if I look deeper, the real root of the problem often came down to culture and leadership. They weren’t making data a priority, and they allowed things to happen that forced everyone downstream to suffer. 

Ramya Krishnaganth: That’s right. Accountability and responsibility always trace back to leadership. How much attention are they paying to it? How vigilant are they? The first thing is establishing accountability and controls. Who is accountable for the data, and who is controlling it? Second is continuous education and training. Data is not a constant; as your business pivots, your data reflects those changes. Are people continuously trained to keep data quality high in the system? 

Paul Barnhurst: I once worked with a CFO who said, “Before I spend any money cleaning up historic data, we need to get our processes in order so we are getting good data today. Once we make sure we are on the same page and have things defined, then I will spend the money to clean up the past. But until things are working well currently, I’m not investing in past data, because we’ll just mess it up again.” Do you typically see companies taking this approach, or do they try to fix everything at once? 

Ramya Krishnaganth: Many leaders come in with the ambition to stir the entire ocean in the first go. This is where we need to educate them. When we start discussing the intricacies of their challenges, we usually take a step back and adopt a methodical approach. Interestingly, after the pandemic, the trend shifted. Previously, companies wanted eight to ten years of historical data cleansed. Now, many say that pre-2020 data isn’t relevant to them, and they only want to look at data from 2021 onward. 

Paul Barnhurst: Do you think companies will just start pushing that date back as time goes on, or has there been a fundamental shift in mindset where they realize they don’t need eight years of history?