Last Month’s Variance Commentary
One record, end to end: from the close to an approved line the analyst would stand behind, with every number tied and every explanation owned.
How it ran
The AIly opens: September closed, the review is Thursday, and last month said watch two lines together.
The analyst hands over the Oracle BvA and control totals.
It ties out, computes, flags material lines on defaults, and catches the pair from memory. ⛳ Stops.
The analyst relays HR. A Slack “yes” is not an approval; it asks for the reference and the amount.
The analyst approves with one edit. The AIly saves what’s open and the correction it learned.
Conversation
The analyst and the AIly only. Labels: FACT sourced and cited · HYPOTHESIS not yet confirmed by its owner · JUDGMENT confirmed with a reference, never self-assigned · DEFAULT a craft default until the team sets its own · ⛳ a gate where the AIly stops.
DEFAULT until the team sets them in 03_INSTANCE/materiality.md. September closed yesterday and the monthly review is Thursday, so commentary is due. One thing from your memory: last month's approved commentary (SAMPLE-001) said watch Contractors and Payroll together, because two contractor roles were converting to employees. September is the first month that would show it. When you're ready, send me the Oracle September BvA and the trial balance control totals. I'll tie out first; nothing gets explained until the numbers tie.FACT · Oracle GL export vs. trial balance, computed this session.Material at 5% (
DEFAULT): Professional fees +53,000 (+58.9% U) · Travel −22,000 (−36.7% F) · Contractors −69,000 (−28.8% F) · Services revenue −89,000 (−10.9% U) · Payroll & benefits +86,000 (+5.7% U).Edge: Other revenue +4,000, exactly 5.0%: material by %, trivial in dollars. ⛳ The default $ floor ("flag the 10 largest") is meaningless with ten lines. What dollar floor do you want? Until you set one, it stays flagged without commentary.
The pair: Payroll +86,000 and Contractors −69,000, the pair your approved commentary told us to watch (SAMPLE-001). Together they net to +17,000. I won't explain either line alone.
HYPOTHESIS: the two Customer Success conversions landed in September; Contractors fell and Payroll rose by similar amounts. If that holds, the actual overspend is about $17K, and overtime is a candidate for that remainder. One yes/no for HR: "Did the two Customer Success contractor conversions take effect in September?" Travel: favorables get the same scrutiny. "Is the $22K under budget a saving, or travel that slipped into October?"Tie-out. September revenue and expense tie to the Oracle trial balance at budget and actual.
FACTPayroll & benefits and Contractors, read together. Payroll $86K (5.7%) over, Contractors $69K (28.8%) under; combined $17K over.
FACT The planned conversion of two Customer Success contractor roles appears to have taken effect in September. HYPOTHESIS, pending HR. The remaining $17K is unexplained (candidates: merit timing, overtime). HYPOTHESISTravel: $22K (36.7%) under.
FACT Saving or timing not yet known.⛳ Stopping here. Nothing moves to
JUDGMENT until owners confirm, with a reference.JUDGMENT, and I never assign that label myself. ⛳ Log it and give me the reference. Also: HR confirmed the conversion happened, not how much it cost. If it moved about the $69K Contractors fell, $17K of Payroll is still open. One more yes/no for HR: "Was the September payroll cost of the two converted roles about $69K?"Input data
Presented in the conversation as Oracle exports.
September budget vs. actual, by reporting line
| Account | Line | Budget | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4000 | Subscription revenue | 2,600,000 | 2,652,000 |
| 4100 | Services revenue | 820,000 | 731,000 |
| 4200 | Other revenue | 80,000 | 84,000 |
| 6000 | Payroll & benefits | 1,500,000 | 1,586,000 |
| 6100 | Contractors | 240,000 | 171,000 |
| 6200 | Software & hosting | 310,000 | 322,000 |
| 6300 | Rent & facilities | 140,000 | 139,000 |
| 6400 | Professional fees | 90,000 | 143,000 |
| 6500 | Travel | 60,000 | 38,000 |
| 6600 | Marketing | 210,000 | 204,000 |
Trial balance control totals
| Measure | Amount | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue actual | 3,467,000 | Sample GL trial balance |
| Expense actual | 2,603,000 | Sample GL trial balance |
| Revenue budget | 3,500,000 | Sample approved budget |
| Expense budget | 2,550,000 | Sample approved budget |
Last month’s approved commentary (memory)
Sample Co is invented. Approval ref SAMPLE-001.
Payroll & benefits: $21K (1.4%) over budget. The annual merit increase took effect one month earlier than budgeted. Timing; the full-year figure is unchanged.
Contractors: $12K (5.0%) under budget. Two contractor roles in Customer Success were approved to convert to employees next month. Expect contractors to fall and payroll to rise from then; watch the two lines together.
Services revenue: on budget. Two implementation projects are scheduled to start next month.
Output
Variances, computed in the session
| Line | Budget | Actual | Var $ | Var % | F/U | Material DEFAULT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subscription revenue | 2,600,000 | 2,652,000 | 52,000 | 2.0% | F | No |
| Services revenue | 820,000 | 731,000 | −89,000 | −10.9% | U | Yes |
| Other revenue | 80,000 | 84,000 | 4,000 | 5.0% | F | Edge |
| Payroll & benefits | 1,500,000 | 1,586,000 | 86,000 | 5.7% | U | Yes |
| Contractors | 240,000 | 171,000 | −69,000 | −28.8% | F | Yes |
| Software & hosting | 310,000 | 322,000 | 12,000 | 3.9% | U | No |
| Rent & facilities | 140,000 | 139,000 | −1,000 | −0.7% | F | No |
| Professional fees | 90,000 | 143,000 | 53,000 | 58.9% | U | Yes |
| Travel | 60,000 | 38,000 | −22,000 | −36.7% | F | Yes |
| Marketing | 210,000 | 204,000 | −6,000 | −2.9% | F | No |
Approved commentary
Drafted with AI assistance · figures tied to source · approval: HR-0914.
Tie-out. September revenue and expense tie to the Oracle trial balance at budget and actual. FACT
Payroll & benefits and Contractors, read together. Payroll is $86K (5.7%) over budget and Contractors $69K (28.8%) under; combined, $17K over. FACT Two Customer Success contractors converted to employees, as planned, on September 1, moving $69K of cost from Contractors to Payroll; the remaining $17K is overtime during the September close. JUDGMENT · owner-confirmed, ref HR-0914 · approved by analyst01.
Still open (not for the review until confirmed): Services revenue −$89K (−10.9%) · Professional fees +$53K (+58.9%) · Travel −$22K (−36.7%), saving or timing.
What it remembers for next time
Point of Departure · analyst01 (05_STATE/analysts/analyst01/)
September Payroll/Contractors commentary approved (HR-0914).
Open, with owners to ask: Services revenue −$89K · Professional fees +$53K · Travel −$22K (saving or timing?).
Instance gap: $ floor for materiality not set (03_INSTANCE/materiality.md); Other revenue (+$4K, 5.0%) flagged without commentary until then.
Correction learned (05_STATE/corrections.md, ACTIVE)
For changes leadership already approved, say "as planned." Why: the review should hear decisions, not surprises. Scope: commentary for internal review.
Cycle board (05_STATE/cycle_board.md)
September · commentary: 1 of 4 material items approved; 3 open.
Starter prompt library
Plain words work. These are starting points an analyst can say as they are.
| When | Say | What runs |
|---|---|---|
| Starting a session | “I'm analyst01.” | Boot: loads your memory and says what's on defaults |
| Close is done | “Run last month's variance commentary.” | variance-commentary |
| Handing over data | “Here's September from Oracle: BvA and control totals. What do you see?” | tie-out-check, then variances |
| Before anything ships | “Check the totals tie before I send this.” | tie-out-check |
| A line you don't recognize | “Explain this line to me like I'm new.” | explain-this |
| Asking owners | “Write the questions for the budget owners.” | owner-questions |
| Drafting | “Draft it as it stands. The ties first.” | Draft with labels; stops at gates |
| Relaying an owner | “HR confirms: … Ref HR-0914.” | Moves a hypothesis toward confirmed |
| Approving | “Approve, with one edit: …” | Final draft; learns the why |
| Teaching it | “From now on, say 'as planned' for approved changes.” | capture-correction |
| Leadership version | “Turn the approved lines into the review narrative.” | exec-narrative |
| Deck vs. numbers | “Does this deck match the numbers?” | consistency-check |
Drafted with AI assistance · figures tied to source · fictional sample data. Cognitive Inheritance Framework © XireTech, used under license.