Business
The Future of the CFO: From Number Cruncher to Value Driver
View the full-size version of this infographic.
Future of the CFO: From Number Cruncher to Value Driver
View the high resolution of this infographic by clicking here.
In today’s fast-paced business landscape, a company’s chief financial officer (CFO) is more integral to operations than ever. In fact, about 41% of CFOs spend the majority of their time on non-finance related activities, fueling data-driven decisions across the business.
The only problem? Leaders outside of finance still see CFOs contributing the most value in traditional finance areas, such as accounting and controlling.
Today’s infographic from Raconteur explores the expanding scope of CFO responsibilities, as well as the perception gap between CFOs and non-finance leaders when it comes to the former’s primary value-driving activities.
The CFO’s Expanding Role
Traditionally, the CFO was focused on financial reporting and issues such as compliance, accounts, and taxation. However, the scope of a CFO’s duties has increased dramatically in recent years. Thanks to technological advances, CFOs are now able to access massive amounts of data on their organization’s operational and financial performance.
“This puts the finance function at the heart or, arguably, the mind of the business from the outset, with many now being crowned as the ‘stewards’ of the long-term enterprise vision.”
—Robin Bryson, Interim CFO at Impero Software
Armed with data, CFOs can help predict headwinds, forecast performance, and make informed decisions across departments. In a global survey, McKinsey asked finance leaders about the breadth of their responsibilities. Of the CFOs who said they spend they a majority of their time on non-finance tasks, here’s where their attention is focused:
Activity | % of CFOs Focused on Activity |
---|---|
Strategic leadership | 46% |
Organizational transformation | 45% |
Performance management | 35% |
Capital allocation | 24% |
Big data and analytics | 20% |
Finance capabilities | 18% |
Technology trends | 5% |
Other (e.g. risk management) | 5% |
However, other business leaders remain in the dark about this broader role.
Differing Views
While the CFO’s job description has evolved considerably, outside perceptions of it have not. In a survey of both CFOs and non-finance leaders, there is a clear difference of opinion with regards to where financial leaders create the most value:
Areas in which CFOs have created the most financial value | % of CFOs who agree | % of others who agree |
---|---|---|
Performance management | 39% | 19% |
Strategic leadership | 39% | 25% |
Traditional finance roles | 33% | 47% |
Organizational transformation | 33% | 21% |
Finance capabilities | 30% | 15% |
Speciality finance roles | 30% | 27% |
Cost and productivity management | 26% | 42% |
Support for digital capabilities and advanced analytics | 15% | 10% |
Mergers and acquisitions (including post-merger integration) | 14% | 23% |
Capital allocation | 10% | 22% |
Pricing of products and/or services | 10% | 8% |
Management of activist investors | 3% | 3% |
CFOs see their largest contributions in the areas of performance management and strategic leadership, while others still consider the CFO’s value to be derived primarily from traditional finance and cost/productivity management.
How can CFOs demonstrate their increased responsibility to leaders outside of the finance realm?
Closing the Gap
According to McKinsey, CFOs can demonstrate their expanded role in three main ways:
1. Actively head up transformations.
While CFOs are already playing a role in transformations, non-finance leaders are less likely to perceive them as making strategic contributions. CFOs also tend to initiate the most transformations in the finance function alone.
To change perceptions, CFOs can lead enterprise-wide transformations, and communicate their strategic value through activities like high-level goal setting.
2. Lead the charge towards digitization and automation.
Few organizations have initiated the shift in a substantial way, with only ⅓ of finance respondents saying their companies digitized or automated more than 25% of their work in the last year.
However, the payoff is well worth the effort. Among those that have undertaken this level of change, 70% reported modest to substantial returns on investment.
3. Develop talent and capabilities across the organization.
CFOs have begun increasing their value through talent-building, but there is still a significant amount of room for further growth.
For example, CFOs can build capabilities during transformations, teach financial topics to non-finance leaders, and develop top talent across the organization.
Through these various strategies, CFOs can foster collaboration and understanding between departments—and succeed in their broader roles.
United States
Charted: U.S. Median House Prices vs. Income
We chart the ever-widening gap between median incomes and the median price of houses in America, using data from the Federal Reserve from 1984 to 2022.
Houses in America Now Cost Six Times the Median Income
This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.
As of 2023, an American household hoping to buy a median-priced home, needs to make at least $100,000 a year. In some cities, they need to make nearly 3–4x that amount.
The median household income in the country is currently well below that $100,000 threshold. To look at the trends between median incomes and median house prices through the years, we charted their movement using the following datasets data from the Federal Reserve:
- Median household income (1984–2022).
- Median Sales Price of Houses Sold (1963–2023).
Importantly this graphic does not make allowances for actual household disposable income, nor how monthly mortgage payments change depending on the interest rates at the time. Finally, both datasets are in current U.S. dollars, meaning they are not adjusted for inflation.
Timeline: Median House Prices vs. Income in America
In 1984, the median annual income for an American household stood at $22,420, and the median house sales price for the first quarter of the year came in at $78,200. The house sales price-to-income ratio stood at 3.49.
By pure arithmetic, this is the most affordable houses have been in the U.S. since the Federal Reserve began tracking this data, as seen in the table below.
A hidden caveat of course, was inflation: running rampant towards the end of the 70s and the start of the 80s. While it fell significantly in the next five years, in 1984 the 30-year fixed rate was close to 14%, meaning a significant chunk of household income went to interest payments.
Date | Median House Sales Price | Median Household Income | Price-to-Income Ratio |
---|---|---|---|
1984-01-01 | $78,200 | $22,420 | 3.49 |
1985-01-01 | $82,800 | $23,620 | 3.51 |
1986-01-01 | $88,000 | $24,900 | 3.53 |
1987-01-01 | $97,900 | $26,060 | 3.76 |
1988-01-01 | $110,000 | $27,230 | 4.04 |
1989-01-01 | $118,000 | $28,910 | 4.08 |
1990-01-01 | $123,900 | $29,940 | 4.14 |
1991-01-01 | $120,000 | $30,130 | 3.98 |
1992-01-01 | $119,500 | $30,640 | 3.90 |
1993-01-01 | $125,000 | $31,240 | 4.00 |
1994-01-01 | $130,000 | $32,260 | 4.03 |
1995-01-01 | $130,000 | $34,080 | 3.81 |
1996-01-01 | $137,000 | $35,490 | 3.86 |
1997-01-01 | $145,000 | $37,010 | 3.92 |
1998-01-01 | $152,200 | $38,890 | 3.91 |
1999-01-01 | $157,400 | $40,700 | 3.87 |
2000-01-01 | $165,300 | $41,990 | 3.94 |
2001-01-01 | $169,800 | $42,230 | 4.02 |
2002-01-01 | $188,700 | $42,410 | 4.45 |
2003-01-01 | $186,000 | $43,320 | 4.29 |
2004-01-01 | $212,700 | $44,330 | 4.80 |
2005-01-01 | $232,500 | $46,330 | 5.02 |
2006-01-01 | $247,700 | $48,200 | 5.14 |
2007-01-01 | $257,400 | $50,230 | 5.12 |
2008-01-01 | $233,900 | $50,300 | 4.65 |
2009-01-01 | $208,400 | $49,780 | 4.19 |
2010-01-01 | $222,900 | $49,280 | 4.52 |
2011-01-01 | $226,900 | $50,050 | 4.53 |
2012-01-01 | $238,400 | $51,020 | 4.67 |
2013-01-01 | $258,400 | $53,590 | 4.82 |
2014-01-01 | $275,200 | $53,660 | 5.13 |
2015-01-01 | $289,200 | $56,520 | 5.12 |
2016-01-01 | $299,800 | $59,040 | 5.08 |
2017-01-01 | $313,100 | $61,140 | 5.12 |
2018-01-01 | $331,800 | $63,180 | 5.25 |
2019-01-01 | $313,000 | $68,700 | 4.56 |
2020-01-01 | $329,000 | $68,010 | 4.84 |
2021-01-01 | $369,800 | $70,780 | 5.22 |
2022-01-01 | $433,100 | $74,580 | 5.81 |
Note: The median house sale price listed in this table and in the chart is from the first quarter of each year. As a result the ratio can vary between quarters of each year.
The mid-2000s witnessed an explosive surge in home prices, eventually culminating in a housing bubble and subsequent crash—an influential factor in the 2008 recession. Subprime mortgages played a pivotal role in this scenario, as they were issued to buyers with poor credit and then bundled into seemingly more attractive securities for financial institutions. However, these loans eventually faltered as economic circumstances changed.
In response to the recession and to stimulate economic demand, the Federal Reserve reduced interest rates, consequently lowering mortgage rates.
While this measure aimed to make homeownership more accessible, it also contributed to a significant increase in housing prices in the following years. Additionally, a new generation entering the home-buying market heightened demand. Simultaneously, a scarcity of new construction and a surge in investors and corporations converting housing units into rental properties led to a shortage in supply, exerting upward pressure on prices.
As a result, median house prices are now nearly 6x the median household income in America.
How Does Unaffordable Housing Affect the U.S. Economy?
When housing costs exceed a significant portion of household income, families are forced to cut back on other essential expenditures, dampening consumer spending. Given how expanding housing supply helped drive U.S. economic growth in the 20th century, the current constraints in the country are especially ironic.
Unaffordable housing also stifles mobility, as individuals may be reluctant to relocate for better job opportunities due to housing constraints. On the flip side, many cities are seeing severe labor shortages as many lower-wage workers simply cannot afford to live in the city. Both phenomena affect market efficiency and productivity growth.
-
Money7 days ago
Visualizing All of the U.S. Currency in Circulation
-
Markets2 weeks ago
Ranked: South Korea’s Largest Companies by Market Capitalization
-
VC+2 weeks ago
What’s New on VC+ in March?
-
Economy2 weeks ago
Confidence in the Global Economy, by Country
-
Wealth1 week ago
Mapped: Where Do the Wealthiest People in the World Live?
-
Misc1 week ago
Ranked: Global Airlines with the Most Plane Crashes
-
Technology1 week ago
Visualizing iPhone 15 Production by Manufacturer in 2023
-
Automotive1 week ago
Visualizing Global Electric Vehicle Sales in 2023, by Market Share