Module · Numbers that reach the board unchecked

The AI-in-Finance Check

A model will produce a variance analysis that looks flawless and cites a figure that does not exist. In finance that is not an embarrassment, it is a misstatement with your name under it. This module checks the five disciplines that decide whether AI speeds the close or quietly corrupts it: verification of the figures, traceability to a source, a clean line between spreadsheet and model, an audit trail of adjustments, and close-process control that does not bend for a fast answer.

Question 1 of 5 · Figures are verified

Before an AI-produced number reaches a report, does someone verify it?

A model states a wrong figure with the same confidence as a right one, and finished-looking output invites you to skip the check. A required verification step, sized to the stakes, is the line between a faster analyst and a faster path to a misstatement.

Question 2 of 5 · Sources are traceable

For any AI-produced figure, can you trace it back to a source?

A number you cannot trace is a number you cannot defend to an auditor, a regulator or a nervous CFO. When AI assembles figures from mixed inputs, the chain from result back to source data is what turns output into evidence rather than assertion.

Question 3 of 5 · Spreadsheet-AI line is clean

Do you know where AI stops and your spreadsheets take over, and vice versa?

The dangerous mix is the invisible one: a model output pasted into a working sheet, then treated as if a human calculated it. When the boundary between AI-generated and human-built is undocumented, nobody knows which numbers were checked and which were assumed.

Question 4 of 5 · Adjustments are logged

When someone changes an AI-produced figure, is the change recorded?

Analysts override AI output constantly, and rightly so. But an adjustment with no record of who, what and why is a hole in the audit trail exactly where judgement entered. The log of overrides is often more important than the original number.

Question 5 of 5 · Close discipline holds

Does your close process survive the pressure to just use the AI number?

The month-end crunch is where controls quietly get skipped for speed. If a fast AI figure can bypass review, reconciliation or sign-off when the deadline bites, then your close discipline exists only on the calm days, which are not the ones that matter.

For the statistics · one click each

Three questions for the public picture

These do not affect your score. They feed the anonymised, aggregated statistics; groups under 8 respondents are never shown.

Where does AI sit in your finance work today?

Not used

Analysis and drafting only

Feeds numbers into reports

Part of the close process

We are not sure

How are AI-produced figures checked before they are used?

Verified against source

Reviewed if material

Glanced at

Taken on trust

No AI figures yet

Has an AI-produced figure ever reached a report with an error?

Not that we know of

Caught before it mattered

Yes, corrected quietly

Yes, with consequences

We could not tell

Your context

Used to calibrate the report. Company size and sector remain in the anonymized dataset; your email does not.

Company size Sector (optional)

Your corporate email required

We do not accept Gmail, Outlook, GMX, etc. Use your company domain.

Anonymised answers feed aggregated public statistics (groups under 8 respondents are never shown); your email is deleted after confirmation. Details: Datenschutz.

I agree that my anonymized answers (without my email or company name) may be used in Thorsten's published analysis. Tell me when new assessments or question modules go live. One email per launch, opt out any time with one click.