Global Journal of Management and Business Research, A: Administration and Management, Volume 23 Issue 1

in financial reporting of tax values that are distorted concerning reality, it should be remembered that, in most cases, general accounting values are taken as a basis for identifying useful data for management control purposes. It is clear that the use of incorrectly determining costs (which, as a result, may be higher or lower than the economically correct ones) leads, on the one hand, to a financial reporting analysis that provides results and outputs that are completely distorted compared to the "real" company situation and, on the other hand, prevents the implementation of policies that allow the achievement of the objectives of the control system which are identified, essentially, in the maximisation of management efficiency and effectiveness. In this area of "consequences", the victims are precisely the company managers who determine indices, flows, aggregates, various indicators, costs and product returns based on incorrect values. Hoping that the reader will forgive the subsequent analogy, it can be said that this behaviour brings to mind those individuals who, from within the company, subject financial reporting to an in-depth analysis using indicators in the full knowledge that the document submitted for examination does not contain, for example, data on sales made 'off the books'. Even in this field, the consequences can be detrimental because deciding based on values that, economically, do not reflect the truth means taking as a reference point data that, potentially, can be misleading and wrong. Leaving aside all legal considerations, it is clear that the preparation and subsequent analysis of false financial reporting lead to decisions that are not in line with the reality under investigation. It is clear that the more the data included in the financial reporting are different from the economically correct values, the more the results of the management analysis (and management control) will be unusable as they are misleading. Suppose, for various reasons, erroneous data is included in the profit and loss account (although aware of the legal and decision-making consequences that such behaviour may cause). In that case, the analyst and the controller must consider such discrepancies when interpreting the data output of the analysis system and the management control system. Otherwise, decisions are taken that are irrational and counterproductive, uneconomic, and contrary to an efficient and effective financial policy. At the end of this brief introduction on the founding elements of a practical, valuable and complete final financial reporting analysis, the writer thinks it appropriate to make a final consideration arising from the consulting experience developed over the last twenty years. Implementing an integrated analysis system consisting of financial reporting analysis, planning and comparison between the results achieved and the objectives set inevitably requires the management's willingness to "structure" and use such a management tool. In the presence of a negative or even uncooperative attitude on the part of both managers and administrators, the implementation of an integrated system of final analysis and planning is, in essence, doomed to failure. With specific regard to the subject of this chapter, namely the analysis of final financial reporting, it should note that a total delegation to the analyst is impossible without a collaborative and proactive willingness within the company. Whoever plans an analysis (and forecasting) system needs access to a series of information that only internal managers possess. The person who has to 'create' and implement, for example, a reclassification of the profit and loss account or balance sheet, which takes into account the specific characteristics of the company, cannot carry out any sensible operation without the collaboration of the company's internal stakeholders. Implementing an integrated analysis and management control system requires managers to devote time and energy to this project. Business consultants are often asked to set up analysis systems "with the understanding that you do everything because your internal staff is so busy". we cannot accept such a request. The direct intervention of the company management and, for some operations, of the administrative staff, is not an 'optional extra' which, in the case of very busy subjects, can be avoided by increasing the consultant's work. The less time management dedicates, especially in the initial phase of preparation of the system's founding elements, the greater the approximation will characterise the system's output results: the analysis of the final data and the creation of a planning and control system requirements, the implementation phase, the massive intervention, and the solid and conscious collaboration of the company management. The absence of such cooperation can significantly reduce the effectiveness of the entire system. This is why the "tailor-made creation" of an integrated analysis and planning system necessarily requires the company to invest in the most precious element in it, i.e. the time and expertise of the company management. The Implementation of an Integrated Information System in the Company: From Option to Obligation for Efficient and Effective Management 8 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( ) A © 2023 Global Journals The entire delegation to the consultant of each phase of the implementation of the system, in order not to further commit the company's working personnel, is contrary to the company's interest since the external professional will have to manage/interpret/reaggregate /synthesise/interconnect a series of data in the absence of indispensable information. As it can be easily understood, this circumstance will cause the realisation of a tool that will never fully develop its capacity to help the management take rational, effective and efficient