Revenue Visibility Review · £595 fixed

Revenue Visibility Review: can we explain the figures?

The monthly revenue number is available, but explaining a change requires combining sales, customer, delivery and finance reports. This review establishes which records connect, where they disagree and what management can reliably conclude.

Written PDF within 10 working days of the final evidence session or final requested input.

Unsnag is not VAT registered, so no VAT is charged. Digital delivery is included. Travel or work outside scope is quoted separately.

The question

Reconciling transactions, work delivered and financial periods

Revenue can fall, margin can narrow or a forecast can miss while every individual report remains technically correct.

The useful test is whether management can distinguish the possible explanations. Was there less demand? Lower conversion? Existing customers spending less? A change in work mix? Delivery timing? Invoicing timing?

No single report has to contain every answer. The reporting available to management should make it possible to follow the change far enough to establish what needs closer investigation.

The trace
Observed result→Management question→Report or metric→Definition→Source→Commercial event
What I test

What the reports must support

The review starts with the questions management needs answered, then works back through the reports and data used to answer them.

01

Coverage. Does the available reporting contain enough information to distinguish the main explanations for a material change?

02

Traceability. Can an important number be followed back through its calculation and source to the customer, project, deal, invoice or operating event behind it?

03

Definitions. Do Sales, Delivery and Finance mean the same thing when they report revenue, pipeline, customer value, margin or project status?

04

Reconciliation. Where two reports describe the same part of the business, can management explain why the numbers agree or differ?

05

Timing. Does the information become visible while management can still act, or only after the customer, project or month has already moved on?

06

Manual reconstruction. Which answers still depend on another spreadsheet, a meeting or the person who knows how the number was produced?

Example

Illustration: what can a 12% revenue decline reveal?

The purpose is not to force one report to answer the whole question. It is to see whether the reporting system can separate materially different explanations.

New demand

Did the volume or quality of new opportunities change?

Conversion

Did the business convert a smaller share of the demand it already had?

Existing customers

Did customers leave, buy less often or reduce the value of work?

Value and mix

Did the mix shift towards smaller or lower-value work?

Delivery

Was work sold but delayed, constrained or not completed when expected?

Finance timing

Did invoicing, recognition or another timing difference change the reported period?

What I need

Evidence required for the review

Company name and website. Two or three reports, dashboards or screenshots management relies on. Who receives them and what question each is expected to help answer. A short list of the systems behind them is useful but does not need to be complete.

The review includes a 75 - 90 minute management working session and one targeted stakeholder check of up to 30 minutes if needed.

Scope: one management question, an agreed sample of existing reports and source records, the stated conversations and a written Revenue Visibility Map. A full data audit, financial assurance, new reporting-system build or wider multi-business-unit investigation requires separate scope and pricing.

Initial contact is through LinkedIn; sensitive reports and customer data should only be shared later using an agreed secure method, not in a first LinkedIn message.

The output identifies which management questions current records can answer and where the explanation breaks down.

Written deliverable

Revenue Visibility Map PDF.

A written map of what management can establish from the reporting it already has, what remains unclear and where the explanation stops being traceable.

Management questions

The material questions the reports are expected to help answer.

Reporting coverage

Which questions are adequately covered, partially covered or not covered by the current information.

Metric definitions

Where important terms are consistent and where the meaning changes between reports or functions.

Traceability

How far material figures can be followed back to the underlying customer, project, transaction or operating event.

Reconciliation breaks

Where two views of the same commercial activity cannot currently be connected or explained.

Timing gaps

Where the information becomes available after the useful decision point.

Manual workarounds

Spreadsheets, meetings, side calculations or individual knowledge currently used to complete the picture.

Priority

Which gap materially affects management's ability to understand revenue or margin, and which gaps can be left alone.

Response

The smallest justified change - reporting, definition, process, CRM, integration, data capture, development or no change.

Timing. The written Revenue Visibility Map is normally delivered within 10 working days of the final agreed input. The schedule and evidence needed are confirmed before the paid review begins.

Worked examples

What the reporting needs to explain

The anonymised situations show where reported results and operational records did not connect. The economic effect still needs to be established from the underlying data.

See situations from earlier professional work →
Scope boundary

Tracing financial totals to commercial events

Financial figures are supplied by the business or its accountant. I examine how customer, sales and delivery activity connects to those figures.

If Finance has established that revenue, margin or another result changed, I examine whether the commercial and operational reporting can explain what happened behind that number.

System boundary

Missing definitions can prevent reconciliation

The gap may sit in a report, definition, handover, process, source data, CRM configuration or the way information moves between Sales, Delivery and Finance.

If the existing tools are sufficient, the recommendation should say so.

When the review is not enough

Limits of the current records

If management can reconstruct what happened but several explanations remain plausible, the next question is no longer about visibility. It is about which explanation survives contact with the evidence.

Revenue Visibility Review

Use this when management cannot reliably follow the result back through the reporting, systems and records already available.

Commercial Diagnostic

Use this when the relevant history can be reconstructed, but the business still needs to determine why the result changed.

See the Commercial Diagnostic →

CRM Decision Review

Use this before choosing or rebuilding CRM when the management requirements are not yet clear enough to define what the system should do.

See the CRM Decision Review →

What to examine next

Choosing between a visibility review and a diagnostic

Some questions can be answered by reconciling the reports you already have.

£595 fixed · written PDF

When every answer requires reconciling several systems, start here.

Contact Yulia on LinkedIn