Data
Inventory sources, ownership, period/basis, quality, rights, reconciliation and refresh. Agree fit-for-use criteria and explicit exclusions.
ACCOUNTABLEFinance controller and source owners
TBM and ITFM adoption / Powered by EPF
Technology financial control, coupled with Enterprise Decision Management
A phased programme for large organisations to establish technology financial control that implements an Enterprise Decision Management-driven TBM model for sustainable use.
We connect Finance-reconciled expenditure to technology resources, services and consumers, then use that evidence for budgeting, forecasting, investment, demand and expenditure decisions. EPF provides the decision, delivery and verification discipline across the programme.
01 / What will be delivered
Scope and framework alignment.
The TBM Council framework is the organising structure; EPF connects requirements, evidence, economics, authority and delivery. The framework describes the practice; the taxonomy classifies the elements used in the model.
- LAYER 1
Foundations
Mandate, data readiness, tools, methods, roles and change.
PRIMARY EVIDENCEAccepted remit, owned sources, available resources and operating procedures.
- LAYER 2
TBM Model
Cost pools, towers, solutions, consumers; relevant sector extensions and connected standards.
PRIMARY EVIDENCEVersioned model, source/rule lineage, reconciliation and tested mappings.
- LAYER 3
TBM Outcomes
Transparency, insights, benchmarking, strategy, alignment and optimisation.
PRIMARY EVIDENCERepeated financial and management work and actual decisions, with limitations.
- LAYER 4
Value Drivers
Financial, operational, innovation, risk/compliance, experience and sustainability consequences.
PRIMARY EVIDENCEAgreed baselines, measures, qualified review and observed results.
Core commissioned scope
Mandate and readiness; financial baseline; operating and financial design; approved model; data integration and configuration; testing; pilot; management adoption; handover and result monitoring. Depth is approved at each release.
Specialist scope to agree
External benchmarking, accredited education, complex migrations, cyber-risk quantification, sector extensions, environmental accounting and advanced cloud engineering are confirmed separately.
Authority remains with the client
Finance owns accounting policy, acceptance and charging authority. Business and service owners make demand and service decisions. EPF recommendations cannot confer those approvals.
02 / Practice readiness
Establishing the TBM foundations.
Each dimension is assessed separately as evidenced, failed, unknown or justified not applicable. Critical failures are never averaged into an overall maturity score.
Tools
Translate use cases into requirements; confirm provider scope, configuration resources, integration, access, support and export.
ACCOUNTABLEPlatform / solution owner
Methods
Agree financial cycles, allocation/rate policy, forecast processes, scenario analysis, disputes, change and benefit verification.
ACCOUNTABLEITFM practice owner with Finance
Roles
Accept remits, authority, available time, competence, cover and independent checks. Identify unassigned work before launch.
ACCOUNTABLESponsor and functional managers
Change
Define actual role behaviours, barriers, learning, support and observation. Identify which superseded activities can stop.
ACCOUNTABLEBusiness/service owners and change lead
Lean delivery without hidden work
The Evangelize core is a Programme Director, Data Analyst and provider liaison. Finance design, configuration, integrations, cloud changes, training and independent review need real capacity — from Evangelize, the client, the platform provider or a contracted specialist.
First release condition
Dependent implementation begins only when the client has approved the mandate, accepted the readiness disposition and confirmed critical resources and source access.
03 / Controlled structure
Example TBM 5 taxonomy.
An illustrative four-layer structure using the TBM Taxonomy 5.0.1 baseline. Arrows represent governed model relationships — not equal allocations or a mandatory one-to-one mapping. EPF sits across the model as controls, not as a fifth layer.
1Technology cost pools
Selected standard pools- Staffing
- Cloud Services
- Software & SaaS
- Outside Services
→ Finance View requires Cost Pools
Approved mapping and allocation
2Technology resource towers
Selected standard towers- Compute
- Application
- End User
- Tech Management
→ Technology View adds Resource Towers
Resource relationships and service drivers
3Technology solutions
Selected solution types- Infrastructure
- Workplace
- Business
- Artificial Intelligence
Attribute solution cost and usage to consumers
4Technology consumers
Consumer groupings- Business Functions & Capabilities
- Business Value Streams
- Partners & Internal Consumers
- External Consumers
→ Consumer View requires all four layers
EPF controls across the model
- Evidence
- Reconciliation
- Ownership
- Change
- Acceptance
- Verification
Selected examples only; not the full classification catalogue, an approved client model or a TBM Council endorsement. Source cost, intermediate allocations, final views and recovered charges are kept distinct to prevent double counting.
04 / Model rules and financial integrity
Cost is conserved, never created.
The same £100,000 flows through every view. Consumer output is the same cost attributed — not additional expenditure — and residuals stay visible rather than being forced into allocations.
01Source cost pools
Cloud Services£60kStaffing£25kSoftware & SaaS£15kFinance-approved source population and recognition basis.
02Resource partition
Compute£50kApplication£40kTech Management£10kAssignments need actual evidence and approved drivers.
03Solution partition
Claims Platform£60kCollaboration£30kResidual£10kClient offerings map to standard categories. Residual stays visible.
04Consumer attribution
Claims Operations£60kCorporate Functions£30kUnresolved£10kThe same cost, attributed — not additional expenditure.
Invented example showing conservation only — not client data, a recommended driver or a savings estimate. One monthly expense basis; no capital cash outlay added to depreciation.
Rules to establish before population
Confirm object IDs, period, currency, accounting basis, control totals, taxonomy version and legacy crosswalks. No missing value becomes zero. Allocations plus residuals reconcile to each source pool within Finance-approved tolerances.
Change and comparability
Old and new data and rule versions are retained, and material changes are compared across all four combinations to separate effects. A redistributed charge does not establish lower enterprise expenditure.
05 / Financial control and planning
The ITFM financial workstream.
Detailed budgeting, forecast, commitment and investment-to-run runbooks are deliverables. Showback publication, chargeback authority, posting approval and benefit verification remain separate decisions.
Accounting baseline
Ledger/sub-ledger bridge; period and currency; accruals, credits, depreciation, capitalisation, exclusions and reconciliations. Finance determines treatment.
Budgeting
Accountable budget holders, planning assumptions, approvals, versions, run/change boundary and service/demand planning.
Forecasting
Rolling actual/budget/forecast bridges; price, volume, mix, FX and timing; driver changes, corrective decisions and ownership.
Commitments
Contract/PO/invoice relationships, renewal and notice dates, minimums, cancellable exposure, unpaid obligations and cash timing.
Workforce
Employee/contractor cost, role allocations, vacancies, available capacity, project/run treatment and approved assumptions.
Service cost and recovery
Cost pools, service units, direct/shared/unallocated views, rates, subsidies, recovery variances and disputes.
Investment and run costs
Whole-life case, capital/run policy, transition costs, retained commitments, service readiness and operating budget transfer.
Period operations
Feed completeness, validation, refresh, provisional/final release, forecast update, correction, posting and closure.
Financial results
Baseline/comparator, intervention cost, attribution, actual release, Finance review, persistence and erosion.
06 / Data contracts and standard interfaces
Connecting the enterprise data.
Every interface has stable identifiers, an authoritative source, permitted purpose, refresh, quality checks, an owner and release evidence. We start with the sources needed for the first decision — not an uncontrolled estate-wide ingestion programme.
Finance and ITFM
Actual/budget/forecast and commitment mapping; source control totals, versioned bridges, policy, period and approval trace.
ITSM and ITAM
Service/application/asset relationships, owners, lifecycle/usage and cost treatment. Orphan, duplicate or stale relationships rejected.
CSDM where used
Version-specific crosswalk from actual ServiceNow records to model services and consumers. CMDB completeness does not prove allocation.
FinOps
Billing and usage mapping, ownership/tags, unit cost, anomaly workflow, usage/rate actions and commitment utilisation. Engineers accept technical changes.
Portfolio and Agile DevOps
Investments, products, teams, capacity, cost and run-cost landing. Release throughput alone does not establish business value.
Cybersecurity and risk
Control/service costs and risk scenarios; scoped qualified review. FAIR quantification only with sufficient data and competence.
Experience
Link service cost and changes to agreed customer, employee and consumer measures, sampling, exclusions and quality consequences.
Sustainability
Energy/emissions data, boundary, methodology, factors, period and uncertainty. Finance reconciliation alone cannot validate it.
07 / From mandate to sustained results
Twelve stages, five dependency-driven waves.
Effort and elapsed time are confirmed after readiness. Source counts, data defects, integrations, provider availability, approval lead times and observation cycles drive duration — not a generic 30/60/90 calendar.
AFrame and assess
Depends on: Initial access and sponsor participation.
Release: Agreed mandate, readiness and bounded next scope.
1Agree the mandate and use cases
Output: Mandate, initial use-case register, decision rights and progressive evidence request.
Gate: Sponsor and Finance authority accept remit and boundaries.
2Assess readiness and remediate blockers
Output: Dimension findings and sequenced remediation.
Gate: Approve permitted bounded work; resolve or explicitly retain critical blockers.
BBaseline and design
Depends on: Financial sources, service ownership and Finance design capacity.
Release: Accepted baseline, operating, model, policy and planning design.
3Establish the financial baseline
Output: Controlled source register, data-quality exceptions and reconciliation bridge.
Gate: Finance accepts fitness for the intended financial use.
4Design the enduring operating model
Output: Operating design, role/function coverage and capacity plan.
Gate: Receiving owners accept scope and funded participation.
5Agree the model and financial policies
Output: Versioned model/policy design and sensitivity analysis.
Gate: Finance and service owners approve their policies; charging needs its own authority.
6Connect planning, investment and demand
Output: Runbooks, scenario definitions, forecast/portfolio interfaces and use cases.
Gate: Budget, portfolio and service owners accept cadence and responsibilities.
CMobilise and build
Depends on: Funded design, provider capacity, rights and interfaces.
Release: Executed build/test evidence and controlled defects.
7Mobilise the integrated delivery plan
Output: Resource-loaded plan, requirements/test traceability and commercial dependency register.
Gate: Client approves funded scope and available technical resources.
8Configure, integrate and test
Output: Configuration, documentation and executed technical and financial test evidence.
Gate: Technical and Finance reviewers accept separately; supplier completion is not client acceptance.
DPilot and adopt
Depends on: Representative population and available users/operators.
Release: Scoped release and observed management use.
9Run and accept the controlled pilot
Output: Results, original failures, fixes/retests and client disposition.
Gate: Accept the specific pilot scope; critical evidence cannot be averaged away.
10Embed the practice in management
Output: Role-based learning, task evidence, management review records and adoption actions.
Gate: Client accepts operational readiness and later sustained adoption.
EImprove and transfer
Depends on: Authorised actions, closed-period observations and funded receivers.
Release: Separately verified results, accepted ownership and continuing monitoring.
11Execute improvements and verify results
Output: Owned intervention cases and observed financial and non-financial results.
Gate: Finance verifies monetary results; specialist owners review other outcomes.
12Transfer ownership and sustain control
Output: Receiving handover, monitoring, escalation and improvement backlog.
Gate: Client accepts normal ownership; closure does not extinguish open benefits or disputes.
Reconciliation, review, action and verification continue after go-live as a separately funded recurring practice.
08 / Who performs, reviews and approves
Delivery governance and acceptance gates.
No supplier assertion, averaged score, synthetic exercise or EPF helper grants client acceptance. Lack of response is not approval.
Programme Director
Integrated plan, economics, dependencies, decisions, provider challenge and release coordination.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYSponsor approves scope and funding; cannot claim independent assurance of own delivery.
Data Analyst
Source profiling, mappings, reconciliation analysis, lineage and test evidence.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYSource owners accept feeds; Finance accepts the financial basis.
Provider liaison
Clarify requests, track obligations and responses, scope and fee dependencies.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYNo implied authority to bind changes, accept rules or approve fees.
ITFM design lead
Accounting/model interfaces, allocations, planning, recovery and cycle design.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYFinance retains accounting and charging approval.
Platform and integration specialists
Configuration, ingestion, migration, performance, access and defects.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYTechnical owner accepts delivery; client authorises live changes.
Independent review
Risk-proportionate challenge of material financial, model and benefit evidence.
CLIENT DECISION BOUNDARYClient accepts reviewer remit, competence, independence and limitations.
Nine separate gates
- 1MandateSponsor and Finance authority
- 2ReadinessSponsor with source/functional owners
- 3Financial baselineClient Finance
- 4Design and policyFinance, service and model owners
- 5Technical deliveryTechnical and security owners
- 6Pilot releaseClient delivery/receiving authorities
- 7ChargingAuthorised Finance authority
- 8Operational handoverReceiving practice/service owners
- 9Benefit verificationFinance/benefit and specialist owners
Recommendation states: Ready for client decision, Rework or Validate before proceeding.
09 / Management capability and enterprise value
Outcomes and measures.
Baselines, definitions, owners and targets are agreed during design. No universal improvement percentage or guaranteed saving is proposed — a management report is an input to action, not proof that value has been realised.
TBM outcomes
- Transparency
- Finance-reconciled coverage, visible residuals and explainable service costs.
- Insights
- Driver analysis, alternatives and decisions supported by traceable evidence.
- Benchmarking
- Comparable cost/performance views with data provenance and rights.
- Strategy
- Funding and portfolio decisions reflected in plans, capacity and forecasts.
- Alignment
- Resolved cross-functional choices, disputes and accepted decision rights.
- Optimisation
- Executed changes, net results, service consequences and persistence.
Financial performance
Verified net cash/run-rate, credible avoidance, recovery, forecast quality or margin effects where supported.
Operational efficiency
Cycle effort, rework, lead time, resource use and service performance; shifted work disclosed.
Innovation
Approved learning/investment objectives, staged funding, delivery feasibility and operating affordability.
Risk and compliance
Control/service outcomes and exposure review; mandatory requirements are not conditional on ROI.
Experience
Customer, employee and consumer quality or effort, with population, service and attribution limits.
Sustainability
Energy/emissions and other scoped measures under an agreed method; no inference from cost alone.
10 / Commission the work in bounded packages
Commercial service structure.
Fees, rates, partner and data costs are agreed after scope and resource validation. Recurring operations require volumes, frequency, service measures and funding — they are not unlimited consultancy.
Assess
Fixed scoped assessment after intake.
CLIENT OUTPUTReadiness, baseline findings, options and implementation decision.
Design
Defined deliverables, or capped discovery then milestones.
CLIENT OUTPUTApproved financial, model and operating design with executable requirements.
Implement
Milestones for defined build; controlled changes for uncertain integration.
CLIENT OUTPUTTested platform, pilot and accepted release scope.
Recover
Paid diagnostic before pricing uncertain remediation.
CLIENT OUTPUTControlled repair, retests and reaccepted operation.
Optimise
Fixed/capped interventions; results fee only if explicitly agreed and verifiable.
CLIENT OUTPUTExecuted action and independently reviewed result.
Operate
Recurring capacity/service bands plus stated changes.
CLIENT OUTPUTCycle packs, exceptions, queries, model administration and review.
Enable
Per cohort or programme, plus authorised certification partner fees if applicable.
CLIENT OUTPUTTask competence and handover evidence.
Compare
Scoped review plus disclosed data/licence charges.
CLIENT OUTPUTNormalised internal or licensed external comparisons.
11 / Client value
Ten advantages the programme is designed to deliver.
12 / First mobilisation
From proposal to a scoped engagement.
The first commissioned work package produces the accepted mandate, minimum evidence request, first use-case scope, authority map, source and access plan, readiness schedule, provider interface and a scoped assessment fee — reported through your existing governance.
To make the proposal binding
Client entities, services and population; priority decisions; platform and provider contracts; available financial and service sources; named approvers and resources; dates and constraints; security and access requirements; specialist scope; budget and commercial terms.
The taxonomy diagram is an original explanatory arrangement of selected labels from the TBM Council Taxonomy 5.0.1 (17 July 2025), with attribution. No Council endorsement, accredited status, external audit opinion, guaranteed saving or comparative superiority is asserted. The client retains financial, investment, risk and operating authority.