Prove · baseline BL-001
O2C Control Tower
O2C Control Tower, all regions, as run before the agents were switched on. Owner at the time of measurement: Tower Lead, Order-to-Cash.
How it was measured
System extract
Sign-off
Who accepted this as the number to beat
Where the benefit lands
Account and cost center this baseline reconciles to
Benefit lines resting on this baseline
10 lines · $25.02m claimed · $21.89m realized · $2.84m verified
| Period | Category | Claimed | Realized | Verified | Status | Variance | Journal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY25 Q3 | Outsourced cost | $3.22m | $2.87m | $2.84m | Verified | Scope Scope drifted after the baseline was signed. The added work is real but it is not this baseline. | JV-2025Q3-0001 |
| FY25 Q4 | Outsourced cost | $4.68m | $4.31m | not verified | Not verified | Timing Benefit landed one period later than claimed. The run rate is intact; the period attribution was wrong. | not posted |
| FY26 Q1 | Outsourced cost | $5.99m | $5.57m | not verified | Not verified | Method mismatch The baseline was measured by survey and the realized figure by system extract. The two are not comparable without a bridge, and no bridge has been built. | not posted |
| FY26 Q2 | Outsourced cost | $7.14m | $6.07m | not verified | Not verified | Unexplained Internal audit could not trace part of the realized figure to a driver. The untraced amount stays in the variance column. | not posted |
| FY26 Q3 | Outsourced cost | $3.99m | $3.07m | not verified | Period open | Period open The period is not closed. The realized figure is a run rate, not a result, and nothing in it has been verified. | not posted |
| FY25 Q3 | Cycle time | $709.3k | $553.2k | not verified | Non cash | Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving. | not posted |
| FY25 Q4 | Cycle time | $1.03m | $906.5k | not verified | Non cash | Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving. | not posted |
| FY26 Q1 | Cycle time | $1.32m | $829.9k | not verified | Non cash | Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving. | not posted |
| FY26 Q2 | Cycle time | $1.57m | $1.24m | not verified | Non cash | Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving. | not posted |
| FY26 Q3 | Cycle time | $878.2k | $526.9k | not verified | Non cash | Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving. | not posted |
A benefit realization ledger reconciled to a general ledger needs the customer’s actual baseline figures and account structure. Modeled numbers demonstrate the instrument and prove nothing about the business case.
The measurement window ran FY25 Q1, thirteen weeks over a sample of 298,571. That sample size is on the page because a baseline drawn from twelve cases and one drawn from forty thousand are not the same instrument, and averaging them into a single confidence figure would hide which one you are looking at.
1 of 5 cash lines resting on this baseline carry a journal reference. A benefit line with no journal reference has not touched the general ledger, so it is shown as claimed rather than counted as realized cash.