What boards really expect - from a CFO and Executive who isn’t coaching from the sidelines

Sarah Schlott hosts her first episode as the new host of FP&A Today, welcoming Peter, a finance executive with 20+ years of C-suite experience who now coaches senior finance leaders and teaches at ESC Business School. The conversation centers on the disconnect between what finance professionals are taught to do and how those principles actually appear (or don't appear) in board presentations.

The discussion begins with what Peter actually reads in board decks. He identifies the executive summary as the critical first page—one that should distill the entire deck into actionable insights, not just data. If the executive summary only informs rather than signals what needs to be decided or acted upon, it fails its purpose. Peter argues that the best meetings can happen in 2-3 pages, and that 30+ page decks accumulate unnecessary analyses over time as different stakeholders request various metrics without anyone removing outdated slides.

The five foundations are examined in detail: First, being a business partner means participating in upstream business decisions before they become numbers, not merely analyzing variances after the fact. A disconnected finance team learns about major business decisions only when they appear in the data. When teams present together to boards, misalignment on targets and assumptions immediately erodes trust. Peter notes that automation and AI will handle the mechanical analysis work, freeing finance professionals to focus on the strategic business partnership piece.

Second, knowing your numbers doesn't mean memorizing everything. Peter criticizes the practice of drilling people on recall—this creates fear and doesn't serve the business. Instead, finance professionals should know the right numbers for their specific business, understand what drives them, and be able to defend and explain them. He introduces the concept that numbers can be available on dashboards rather than printed on decks, and emphasizes the 'what-so-what-now what' test: if you can't explain why a number matters or what action it demands, it shouldn't be presented.

Third, storytelling is misunderstood as entertainment or manipulation. Peter clarifies it as creating a coherent narrative thread (called a 'red line') that connects data points into a cohesive story. He uses McKinsey's SCQA framework (situation, complication, question, answer) as an example. The storyteller's job is to bring numbers to life with context—like explaining that COGS increased because you invested in infrastructure for a new customer, not because spending ran away. The human element of storytelling, as opposed to AI-generated commentary, is proposing what should happen next and influencing the board toward a decision.

Fourth, getting a seat at the table isn't about being present in meetings; it's about being an active, knowledgeable participant in the right rooms. The most important tables aren't board meetings but the earlier discussions where business decisions are being made. Being at those tables upstream prevents being blindsided by decisions that haven't been financed.

Fifth, being forward-looking doesn't mean ignoring the past. The best forecasts are built by people obsessed with understanding why historical patterns repeat—which accruals consistently reoccur, which vendors always land in month three, which assumptions have been consistently wrong. However, leaders today must be willing to throw out assumptions quickly and adapt to changing conditions rather than rigidly following multi-year plans. Peter suggests balancing 24-36 months of detailed bottoms-up and top-down forecasting with looser high-level projections for years 4-5.

A recurring insight is that board decks should be tailored to who is actually sitting in front of you and what they need, not inherited templates. In PE-backed private companies, decks skew 80% forward-looking; in public companies, there's more historic reporting. Peter notes that capex spend is rarely reviewed post-project to assess whether ROI assumptions were met, and liquidity/cash management is often underemphasized despite being critical.

The conversation stresses that these foundations aren't industry-specific but rather dependent on company growth phase and stakeholder composition. Peter's final guidance is radical: stop presenting to inform and start presenting to influence outcomes. If your presentation only informs, send it as a PDF and skip the meeting.