Why Data Quality Matters Across Your Finance Function

Aug 31, 2026

I spend a lot of time looking at financial systems and processes, and one thing I keep coming back to is that the quality of the output depends heavily on what is happening much earlier in the process.

A business can have good accounting software, payroll software and reporting tools in place, but those systems are still working with the information they are given. If employee details are outdated, transactions are being recorded inconsistently or information is moving between systems incorrectly, the problem eventually appears somewhere else.

Sometimes it appears in payroll, or affects a report that management is relying on. In other cases, it only becomes obvious when someone has to work backwards to understand why two systems no longer agree.

The ATO’s recent guidance around Payday Super is a timely example. It is encouraging employers to pay closer attention to the quality of employee and payroll information, including keeping details current, checking information before processing and resolving data issues when they are identified. Poor-quality information can contribute to rejected or delayed super contributions.

The broader lesson applies well beyond super.

Small data problems rarely stay in one place

One thing I recently discussed with Chris was how much useful financial reporting depends on the bookkeeping underneath it.

A report can still be generated when the information feeding it is incomplete or poorly structured. The fact that the software has produced a report does not automatically mean management has something useful to work with.

The same issue appears when systems are connected. Information may move automatically between payroll, bookkeeping, expense management and reporting platforms, but automation does not tell you whether the original information was correct.

For a business using several systems across its finance function, a relatively small error at the beginning of the process can therefore travel much further than expected.

This is why I tend to look at the process around the technology as closely as the technology itself. I want to know where the information originated, who is responsible for maintaining it, what happens when something changes and how the business checks that information has moved correctly between systems.

We spoke about a similar issue in our content interview when discussing management reporting. If a business owner receives reports but cannot confidently understand what the numbers are telling them, the problem may sit further back in the way the information has been recorded and structured.

Automation still needs somebody checking the exceptions

Technology can remove repetitive work and make a finance function far more efficient, but it still needs a good process around it.

A payroll system can process the information it has been given. An integration can move information from one platform to another. A reporting tool can present the numbers sitting in the accounting system.

What those tools cannot do indefinitely is compensate for incorrect setup, outdated records or a process where nobody is responsible for checking what happens when something does not work as expected.

The ATO’s current Payday Super guidance reinforces this from a payroll perspective. Employers are being encouraged to keep employee information accurate, check data as part of their payroll processes and deal with issues promptly rather than allowing them to continue across future pay runs.

I think the same discipline should apply across the finance function.

If information is maintained properly at the source and there is a clear process for identifying exceptions, technology can do a lot of the heavy lifting. When those controls are missing, automation can simply move an error through the business faster.

What I would look at first

If I were reviewing the finance systems of an established business, I would be less interested in how many platforms they use and more interested in how reliably information moves between them.

I would want to understand who owns the information at each stage, which systems rely on it and how the team knows when something has not worked correctly.

I would also want to know how often those processes are reviewed. Businesses change, employees change roles, payroll arrangements change, new software is introduced and integrations are added over time. A process that was set up correctly two years ago may no longer reflect the way the business operates today.

The end goal is for management to have enough trust in the underlying information that when a financial report arrives, the conversation can be about what the numbers mean and what to do next, rather than whether the numbers are right.

If the same finance issues keep resurfacing in different places, I would be looking at the process before blaming the software. If you want a second set of eyes on how your payroll, bookkeeping and reporting systems are working together, get in touch with the PBS team.