The quarterly financial report a Technology Operating Partner engagement produces for the CFO, constructed as an illustrative composite.
Read this first
Every number, vendor name, project, and outcome in this document is constructed as an illustrative composite. None of it is real company data. Values are assumed for a stated firm profile. Framework citations and source publications are real. See the Methodology Appendix and the Defensibility Ledger at the end.
The Technology P&L below is the report a Technology Operating Partner engagement produces for the CFO each quarter: total IT spend by TBM tower, versus plan, with analytical notes and the decisions for the next quarterly review.
This sample shows a CFO the format of the report before engaging Preside.
Firm profile
Revenue
$180M
Business services
Headcount
1,637
FTE, mid-market services
Fiscal year
FY26
Through Q3
Total IT spend
$5.60M
3.11% of revenue (FY forecast)
CFO deliverable
Based on the TBM Council Taxonomy v4.0 and v4.1, a widely used taxonomy for IT financial reporting. Tower names are adapted for this sample. Each tower is presented at FY plan, YTD through Q3, and full-year forecast, expressed as absolute dollars and as a share of revenue.
Example. All figures are illustrative.
Fiscal year forecast · through Q3 FY26
Technology P&L by TBM tower
| TBM tower | Category | FY plan | YTD (Q3) | FY forecast | Variance to plan | % of revenue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| End User Computing | Run | $810K | $608K | $830K | +$20K · +2.5% | 0.46% |
| Infrastructure & Cloud | Run | $1,350K | $1,000K | $1,395K | +$45K · +3.3% | 0.78% |
| Business Applications | Grow | $1,485K | $1,113K | $1,510K | +$25K · +1.7% | 0.84% |
| Data & Platform | Grow | $324K | $243K | $330K | +$6K · +1.9% | 0.18% |
| Security, Compliance & DR | Run | $594K | $445K | $620K | +$26K · +4.4% | 0.34% |
| IT Management & Delivery | Run | $432K | $324K | $440K | +$8K · +1.9% | 0.24% |
| Telecom & Connectivity | Run | $162K | $122K | $165K | +$3K · +1.9% | 0.09% |
| Strategic Initiatives | Transform | $243K | $182K | $310K | +$67K · +27.6% | 0.17% |
| Total IT | $5,400K | $4,037K | $5,600K | +$200K · +3.7% | 3.11% |
Analytical notes
OpEx / CapEx allocation (illustrative)
Decisions surfaced for next quarter
Appendix A
Every figure above derives from one of three sources: a published benchmark cited inline, a logical derivation from a published benchmark using the stated firm profile, or an illustrative value marked as such. This appendix documents each derivation so any reviewer can trace the number back to its origin.
M1 · Total IT as percent of revenue (3.11%)
An assumption chosen for this example, with a Run-heavy profile driven by Infrastructure & Cloud investment. It is not taken from a published benchmark. A live engagement compares total IT as a percent of revenue with published sources, such as the Avasant IT Spending and Staffing Benchmarks (subscription), which report the ratio by industry and company size.
M2 · Absolute tower dollar values
Each tower's FY forecast is an assumed value, set so the towers sum to the stated total of 3.11 percent of $180M revenue. In total, FY plan is set 3.7 percent below FY forecast. Individual towers vary, from 1.7 to 27.6 percent (see M6). YTD through Q3 reflects three completed fiscal quarters and totals approximately 72 percent of the FY forecast, with variance by tower to reflect seasonality. Every row's math is arithmetically consistent with the totals.
M3 · Run / Grow / Transform allocation (62% / 33% / 5%)
Direct aggregation of the tower classifications above: Run = End User Computing + Infrastructure & Cloud + Security, Compliance & DR + IT Management & Delivery + Telecom & Connectivity = $3.45M. Grow = Business Applications + Data & Platform = $1.84M. Transform = Strategic Initiatives = $0.31M. Percentages compute against the $5.60M total. Framework: Gartner Run/Grow/Transform categorization.
M4 · Vendor concentration language
Illustrative statement that three vendors account for a large share of relevant spend. No figure is asserted, and no published benchmark is used.
M5 · Realized savings ($380K)
Illustrative value representing prior-year vendor consolidation and license rightsizing savings flowing through the current fiscal year. It is a constructed number and is not a typical result.
M6 · Variance to plan (FY forecast vs FY plan)
Straight arithmetic: FY forecast minus FY plan, and (FY forecast − FY plan) ÷ FY plan expressed as a percentage. Each row and the total reconcile. The Strategic Initiatives variance (+27.6%) is deliberately outsized to reflect the pattern where discretionary transform work absorbs mid-year re-prioritization spend that other towers do not. In a live engagement, each variance line would carry a narrative explanation and (where applicable) a decision to accept, redirect, or claw back.
M7 · OpEx / CapEx allocation (~83% / ~17%)
Illustrative composite: cloud subscriptions and vendor SaaS flow through OpEx; internal-use software development eligible for capitalization under ASC 350-40 (Business Applications, Data & Platform, Strategic Initiatives development components) forms the CapEx portion. Actual capitalization determination is per-project and per-vendor and requires accounting-team review; the ~$0.95M CapEx figure is a directional assumption, not a specific accounting position. The capitalization decision stays with the company, its accounting team, and its auditors.
Appendix B
Every external claim and framework in this sample, with its source and status. PUBLISHED means the source is a published framework, standard, or report. Preside has not independently checked any specific figure against it. ILLUSTRATIVE means the value is constructed to fit the composite; the framework it sits inside is published but the specific number is not sourced.
| Claim / figure | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| TBM Taxonomy tower structure | TBM Council, TBM Taxonomy v4.0 and v4.1. Tower names are adapted for this sample. | Published |
| Total IT % of revenue (3.11%) | Assumption chosen for this example. A live engagement compares it with published benchmarks. | Illustrative |
| Absolute dollar values in P&L table | Assumed per tower so the total reconciles to 3.11% of the $180M revenue profile | Illustrative |
| Gartner Run/Grow/Transform framework | Gartner, published framework | Published |
| Vendor concentration statement | Illustrative assumption. No published benchmark, including Vertice, is used in this sample. | Illustrative |
| Illustrative decision magnitudes ($85K, $700K-$900K, $112K, $380K) | Sized to be consistent with the P&L totals and typical of the decision scale at $180M mid-market services | Illustrative |
| Variance to plan (per-row and total) | Straight arithmetic (FY forecast − FY plan) with percentage over FY plan; all rows and total reconcile | Illustrative |
| ASC 350-40 capitalization framework | FASB Accounting Standards Codification, Topic 350-40, Internal-Use Software | Published |
| Illustrative ~83% OpEx / ~17% CapEx split | Assumed for this composite. Not a specific accounting position; the per-project determination stays with the company, its accounting team, and its auditors. | Illustrative |
Looking for the executive governance dashboard? View the CEO Quarterly Technology View sample →
To scope how this Technology P&L would work at your company: Book a 30-minute call →