Four Perspectives on One Decision
- Aug 11
- 6 min read
Malgorzata is a Finance and Operations Executive with over 20 years of global experience helping organizations navigate growth and transformation across Europe and the U.S. She holds a PhD from Télécom SudParis, a leading French university.
When a company makes an important decision, finance usually has an important voice. The nature of that contribution, however, depends significantly on the experience and perspective of the person sitting in the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) chair. Our professional backgrounds shape the way we analyze situations, the risks we notice, the assumptions we challenge, and ultimately the areas that receive the most attention. Over the course of my own career, I have had the opportunity to work in the four areas described below: external audit, internal audit, finance leadership and investing, and have seen how each adds a different perspective to the same business decision.
Let’s imagine that a company is considering acquiring a business that operates a manufacturing facility. Strategically, the acquisition could be a valuable extension of its current activities, providing additional production capacity and access to new customers. Four different CFOs are asked to present their assessment of the deal to the board. They are all experienced and credible finance leaders, and they all have access to the same information.
CFO 1: The former Big Four audit partner, and the risk perspective
The first CFO spent many years in a Big Four firm, eventually becoming an audit partner. They have reviewed hundreds of financial statements, worked with dozens of boards and audit committees, navigated complex transactions, and developed a broad perspective on governance and risk. They know the sector extremely well and have participated in enough high-stakes discussions to recognize risks that may not be visible in the financial model. Their extensive network, most likely including CEOs, CFOs, and audit committee chairs from Fortune 500 companies, provides valuable benchmarks and perspectives.
Their assessment will naturally place considerable emphasis on the reliability of the business being acquired and the risks the transaction introduces. At the intersection of finance and legal, they will scrutinize the quality of the target’s financial information, valuation, contractual commitments, litigation and potential liabilities. Complex areas such as consolidation, merger accounting and valuation will also form part of the assessment. Their understanding of the sector will add another layer, bringing geopolitical, regulatory and broader market risks into a discussion that could otherwise remain focused primarily on the financial model.
The external perspective will matter as well. The acquisition will eventually need to be reflected in the company’s external reporting. The CFO will consider its impact on the risk disclosures in the 10-K or annual report, the way shareholders are likely to interpret the transaction, and the potential reputational risks if the investment does not develop as planned. This perspective gives the board a structured view of the financial, governance and reputational landscape related to the strategic opportunity.
CFO 2: The former head of internal audit, and the process perspective
The second CFO spent several years leading an internal audit function. Their attention will naturally move towards how the acquired company operates, how decisions are made, and whether the organization has the processes, systems, and controls required to operate effectively as part of a larger group. The maturity of the organization beneath the reported financial performance will be an important part of their assessment.
For a manufacturing acquisition, the process perspective extends well beyond finance. Manufacturing processes, quality management, procurement, inventory, payments and financial reporting all need to work within the combined organization. The strength of the target’s control environment and any significant weaknesses will influence the integration priorities. IT platforms, systems integration and cyber risk will also receive significant attention.
Many of these observations will flow directly into the company’s risk management activities. The acquisition may introduce new items into the internal risk matrix, while the facility itself may become a priority area in the following year’s internal audit plan. The audit committee will expect visibility over integration risks, remediation plans and the development of the control environment. This perspective creates continuity between the risks identified during due diligence and the processes, controls and governance required once the company becomes the owner.
CFO 3: The finance operator, and the team perspective
The third CFO previously held a Head of Finance role in another industrial company. They have spent years managing finance teams through budgets, forecasts, month-end closing, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementations, working capital challenges, and changing business priorities. Their first concern is therefore likely to be the team.
They know that while an acquisition can look compelling in a board presentation, on Monday morning somebody still needs to pay suppliers, close the books, prepare the forecast and explain the monthly results. If the team is suddenly expected to integrate a new ERP, consolidate another legal entity, align accounting policies, redesign reporting, onboard new colleagues and support management with integration decisions while still running the day-to-day operation, it’s a perfect setup for failure. A finance team already operating at full capacity cannot absorb a major acquisition simply by adding an integration workstream to the existing agenda. Priorities need to change.
Once the ability to execute is secured, the finance operator will focus heavily on the economics of the combined business. Manufacturing costs, margins, capacity utilization, working capital, budgeting and forecasting will all need to reflect the new reality. Cost savings and synergies will need owners and regular follow-up. Net Present Value (NPV) and scenario analysis remain important, but this CFO brings an additional layer–translating the assumptions approved in the investment case into the business's monthly performance management.
CFO 4: The investor, and the IRR perspective
The fourth CFO comes from an investment background, having worked in venture capital (VC) or private equity (PE). They have reviewed hundreds of business cases, participated in numerous due diligence processes, and spent years making decisions about where capital should be deployed. Their perspective will naturally focus on the relationship between the capital invested today and the value that can be created over the coming years.
The acquisition will be considered through a clear value creation thesis. The starting Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA), the potential to increase it, and the operational initiatives required to achieve that improvement will form the core of the assessment. Synergies, commercial growth, productivity improvements, automation and changes to the cost structure will be translated into a transformation plan. A PE-style 100-day plan may establish priorities after closing, while the capabilities of the existing leadership team will be considered in the context of what the transformation requires.
Internal Rate of Return (IRR), NPV and the impact on enterprise value provide the financial framework for this perspective. The investor will also bring a strong sensitivity to the cost of capital, comparing the expected return from the acquisition with other uses of the company’s capital. The transaction becomes part of a longer value creation journey in which operational improvements, strategic execution and capital allocation ultimately need to translate into increased value for shareholders.
Bringing the perspectives together
All four CFOs would produce excellent assessments of the same acquisition. Each would bring considerable expertise to the boardroom and identify issues that materially improve the quality of the decision. Their different backgrounds create different centers of gravity, risk and external stakeholders, processes and controls, people and execution, and return on invested capital. The real strength comes from having these perspectives work together, with each contributing something different to the overall assessment.
You can have the world’s best violinist, pianist and percussionist, but the quality of the performance depends on how well they listen to one another and understand their role within the composition. Finance works in a similar way. Risk, processes, people, performance and return on capital are interconnected elements of the same business decision. Bringing them together gives management and the board a more complete picture of the opportunity, the organization required to deliver it, and the value that can realistically be created.
Read more from Malgorzata Guyot
Malgorzata Guyot, International Finance Executive
Malgorzata is a Finance and Operations Executive with over 20 years of global experience helping organizations navigate growth and transformation across Europe and the United States. She has worked with both publicly listed and private equity-backed companies, supporting leadership teams through periods of change, expansion, and complexity. Her career has taken her across multiple countries and cultures, shaping a global perspective and a practical, people-centered approach to leadership. Today, she advises executives and boards on building resilient organizations, strengthening governance, and making better strategic decisions. Malgorzata holds a PhD from Télécom SudParis, a leading French university.
