Workflows
Applications for
financial workflows.
Examples include document search, deal workbooks, portfolio reporting, and diligence tracking. Each illustrates how document processing can be integrated with a firm’s templates and review procedures.
Company A, B, and C are generic labels. All figures and files are sample data, not real company or client records. These workflows illustrate potential scoped systems, not customer deployments.
Boutique banks & advisory practices
Document indexing and search
Inconsistent file names and folder structures make historical documents difficult to locate. A document register can associate each file with its entity, period, and original location while preserving the existing shared-drive structure.
Inputs, review, and output
- What comes in
- Approved shared-drive folders, nested deal directories, PDFs, and spreadsheets with inconsistent names and repeated versions.
- How it could work
- Classify documents by engagement, entity, and period. Surface likely duplicates and flag ambiguous versions for review, under agreed access rules.
- What comes out
- A searchable document register with useful metadata and links back to originals. Authoritative files can stay where they are.
CIM_v2 identifies the same year. Its name alone does not establish which version to use.
Inspect original-file references
Illustrative paths. Authoritative files stay in place.
/Engagements/Company_A/02_Financials/Company_A_CIM.pdf
/Engagements/Company_A/Received/Sept/Company_A_CIM_v2.pdf
/Engagements/Company_A/02_Financials/FY2025_statements.pdf
The index can be introduced without moving files or changing permissions. Those changes would need a separately agreed scope.
Discuss your workflowBoutique investment banks & independent PE
Financial extraction with source references
Preparing deal workbooks requires extracting and reconciling figures across financial statements, transaction materials, and models. We map the agreed fields to the firm’s template, retain source references, and flag discrepancies for review.
Inputs, review, and output
- What comes in
- The CIM, financial statements, management presentation, quality-of-earnings report, and operating model.
- How it could work
- Map agreed fields to the team’s template. Keep currency, units, period, and source location attached. Route conflicting figures and earnings adjustments to a reviewer.
- What comes out
- An illustrative deal workbook in the firm’s existing format, with sourced fields and an exception list for the deal team.
Your deal review template
| Requested field | FY2025 | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 84.2 | CIM · p. 24 |
| Reported EBITDA | 12.6 | CIM · p. 25 |
| Adjusted EBITDA | Review | QoE · p. 18 |
Adjusted EBITDA is held for reviewConflicting adjustment totals. No value accepted.
Each mapped field keeps its reporting period, units, and source reference in the workbook.
Selected sources, with locations
- Revenue · 84.2
- Company_A_CIM.pdf · p. 24
- Reported EBITDA · 12.6
- Company_A_CIM.pdf · p. 25
- Adjusted EBITDA · 14.1 / 13.8
- Company_A_QoE.pdf · p. 18
Operating_model.xlsx · Financials!F18
CIM_v2 remains unconfirmed in the document register. It does not silently replace the selected source.
Confirm the adjustment bridge
12.6 reported + 1.5 / 1.2 in adjustments. The bridge needs confirmation.
QoE reports adjusted EBITDA of 14.1; the operating model shows 13.8. Confirm the adjustment bridge before using either figure.
Awaiting professional review. Neither figure is accepted into the workbook.
The team retains diligence judgment and final decisions. No investment recommendations or guarantee of diligence completeness.
Discuss your workflowIndependent PE, portfolio operations & valuation
Standardized portfolio reporting
Portfolio companies submit reports in different formats and on different schedules. A reporting workflow can consolidate agreed metrics into the firm’s template and identify missing submissions or inconsistent units before sign-off.
Inputs, review, and output
- What comes in
- Monthly or quarterly portfolio-company reports and the team’s previous reporting workbook.
- How it could work
- Match the company and period, extract agreed metrics, and compare with the prior period. Flag missing submissions and unit mismatches before they enter the output.
- What comes out
- A consistent portfolio table or existing Excel template with source references, exceptions, and a professional sign-off step.
Revenue increased from 20.4 to 21.8 USD million. Both periods are attached for the reviewer to check.
Company_A_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 3 / Company_A_Q2_2026.pdf · p. 3Inspect source references
- Company_A_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 3 / Company_A_Q2_2026.pdf · p. 3. Revenue increased from 20.4 to 21.8 USD million. Both periods are attached for the reviewer to check.
- Company_B_Q1_2026.xlsx · Summary!B8 / Company_B_Q2_2026.xlsx · Summary!B8. The Q2 submission reports 10,200 in USD thousands. The workbook uses USD millions, so conversion is held for confirmation.
- Company_C_Q1_2026.pdf · p. 2 / Q2 source not received. The Q2 submission has not been received. The previous period remains visible; no new revenue figure is filled in.
A configurable reporting workflow. Valuation judgments remain with the professionals responsible for them.
Discuss your workflowTransaction advisory & deal execution teams
Diligence request tracking
Diligence tracking requires checking whether received documents cover the requested information and reporting period. We can match files to the request list and propose status changes, with supporting evidence for the team to review.
Inputs, review, and output
- What comes in
- The current diligence request list and newly received data-room files.
- How it could work
- Match files to requests and check coverage and reporting periods. Distinguish received, missing, partial, and needs-confirmation items.
- What comes out
- A reviewable tracker with proposed status changes and supporting file links, ready for the team to confirm.
The file matches the requested year. A proposed “received” status records delivery; the team still reviews the substance.
A received file does not mean substantive diligence is complete. External communications remain subject to human review.
Discuss your workflowProject inquiries
Discuss your requirements
Share an overview of your current process, data sources, and required outputs. We can assess the scope, integration requirements, and deployment options.