idu Software

Thursday, 24 January 2019

IDU wins a High Performer award in the CPM industry category of the G2 Crowd 2019 Winter Report

IDU has been identified as a High Performer in the Corporate Performance Management (CPM) industry by the prestigious G2 Crowd 2019 Winter Report.

The report which ranks and compares leading CPM solutions based on market presence and customer satisfaction ratings was released earlier this month.

“Rankings on G2 Crowd reports are based on data provided to us by real users,” said Michael Fauscette, chief research officer, G2 Crowd. “We are excited to share the achievements of the products ranked on our site because they represent the voice of the user and offer terrific insights to potential buyers around the world.”

According to G2 Crowd, “High Performers provide products that are highly rated by their users, but have not yet achieved the market share and scale of the vendors in the Leader category.”

 We are incredibly grateful to our customers for sharing their recommendations. We strive to deliver a combination of the best possible product, user experience and support to our customers, and this feedback shows we are on the right track.” says Kevin Phillips, CEO, IDU.

We wanted to share some of the amazing feedback we received from our customers in their reviews:

“IDU is not only a great and easy to use budgeting application, but helps drive day to day ownership of business unit or departmental budgets, cost management, revenue growth and variance reporting by the business unit or department leaders.”

“IDU is excellent and user friendly, it gives you the ability to view your financial data in the most effective and simplistic way possible. This software can be used by everyone (including a non-financial user).”

“IDU offers excellent software and support.”

To read the full list of reviews please visit the IDU page on G2 Crowd. 

Read more about IDU or to schedule a demo of our software visit our website at

About G2 Crowd
G2 Crowd, the world’s leading business solution review platform, leverages more than 440,000 user reviews to drive better purchasing decisions. Business professionals, buyers, investors, and analysts use the site to compare and select the best software and services based on peer reviews and synthesized social data. Every month, more than one million people visit G2 Crowd’s site to gain unique insights. Co-founded by the founder and former executives of SaaS leaders like BigMachines (acquired by Oracle) and SteelBrick (acquired by Salesforce) and backed by more than $45 million in capital, G2 Crowd aims to bring authenticity and transparency to the business marketplace. For more information, go to

Thursday, 17 January 2019

Can blockchain and POPI be friends?

Inevitably innovation challenges the typical ways of doing things and regulation always seems to lag progress. How can we balance protecting personal identification information with the opportunities offered by blockchain?

There’s no doubt that 2018 was the year that the protection of personal information became front of mind, whether through data breaches, Facebook sharing information for dubious purposes, or the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union and the still pending roll out of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) in South Africa. Depending on your perspective, 2018 was when we finally started ensuring companies take their responsibilities seriously, or the year we started breaking things and stifling innovation by trying to protect personal information in inappropriate ways. (It’s probably a bit of both.) 

Take POPI and blockchain, for instance. Blockchain is the distributed ledger technology that underlies cryptocurrencies, but also can be used to power many other things. For instance, Malta is looking at a blockchain-powered land and health registry. And Estonians can log into their blockchain-based healthcare registry and see exactly who has accessed their details.

The savings alone that blockchain offers are staggering. Goldman Sachs estimates that the securities industry could save $11 - $12 billion in fees by using blockchain to remove errors in the clearing and settlement of cash securities. And we have only started to scratch the surface of what blockchain technology will allow us to do. It’s useful to think of blockchain as an operating system, like Microsoft Windows or Apple OS. The really exciting stuff is what people will develop on top of it. 

A fundamental feature of a blockchain, what makes it so useful for storing important records, is that it can never be erased or rewritten. But wait a minute, what about the right to be forgotten, to have personal data deleted, especially from the internet? This is explicit in GDPR, which any South African company dealing with customers in the European Union has to comply with, and implied by POPI, which says that people can request their personal information and records be corrected or deleted. 

Does this mean we have to choose? Remain stuck in the past and miss out on the promise of what blockchain will enable for us and our customers, or risk the fines threatened by POPI and GDPR and the brand damage associated with non-compliance? Alternatively, do we water down blockchain technology, and its capabilities and promise? Can you imagine if almost 40 years ago, we severely constrained an aspect of the brand-new Microsoft Windows interface manager? What would we have missed out on? Let’s not do that with blockchain, either.

Blockchain 101
Unlike central registries controlled by a single authority, say a bank, blockchain ledgers are spread out over a number of anonymous computers, connected on a peer-to-peer basis. The people involved don’t have to know, or even trust, each other. Transactions are announced to the group and recorded by everyone. At set intervals a section of the ledger, called a block, is locked irreversibly using cryptography and information from the previous block, and added to the blockchain. Working on the principle that the majority is honest, if any copy of the block on the network doesn’t match that of the others, it is replaced with information the majority agree on. In other words, the longest block is the true one.

Thursday, 13 December 2018

Does GDPR spoil the blockchain party for everyone?

 Image result for balloons popping

In a constantly and rapidly changing world, I wonder if a large part of the blockchain’s appeal isn’t its durability, its steadfastness, its immutability. And this characteristic – that it can’t be changed – is definitely one the very many advantages of the blockchain, and the future services running on it. Cut out the corruption, inefficiencies, fraud and plain old human error in transactions in one fell swoop.

But, what happens when the irresistible appeal of the blockchain, and we’ve hardly even begun to scratch the surface of what it will enable, comes up against the immovable object that is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)? I’ve had a bone or two to pick with the GDPR before, both in terms of the likely burden it places on small and medium businesses , and also the impracticability of the right to request your personal identification be erased  and the knock on effects this can have of actually running a business.

Now, I’m wondering what impact this right to be forgotten will have on the potential of the blockchain, given that it seems to be entirely at odds with how the blockchain operates, and hence the value and disruption it, as a decentralised ledger, can deliver.

A quick recap. The, as yet mostly untested, GDPR gives individuals the right to request an organisation delete their personal identification information in certain circumstances. These include that the data is no longer needed for the reason it was originally collected; when the individual withdraws their consent that their data be stored or objects to its being processed; if the data is being stored in breach of the GDPR; to comply with a legal obligation; or if the personal data belongs to a child.

As yet, it’s unclear what erase means, especially within a digital context. Does it mean erase entirely or just make it inaccessible? In my previous article  I discussed some of the knock-on effects this can have in the pre-blockchain world, but now let’s consider what this means for a world built on the blockchain.

Unlike central registries controlled by a single authority, say a bank, public blockchain ledgers are spread out over a number of anonymous computers, connected on a peer-to-peer basis. The people involved don’t have to know, or even trust, each other. Transactions are announced to the group and recorded by everyone. At set intervals a section of the ledger, called a block, is locked irreversibly using cryptography and a piece of information from the previous block, and added to the chain. Working on the principle that the majority is honest, if any copy of the block on the network doesn’t match that of the others it is replaced with information the majority agree on. In other words, the longest chain is the true one.

Although best known for powering crypto-currencies, blockchain can also be used for many other things. For instance, Malta is looking at a blockchain-based land and health registry. And Estonians can log into their blockchain healthcare registry and see exactly who has accessed their details. The savings alone that blockchain offers are staggering. Goldman Sachs estimates that the securities industry could save $11 to $12 billion in fees by using blockchain to remove errors in the clearing and settlement of cash securities.

So, what happens then, in the case of Estonia say, when a citizen requests their personal identification information be erased in compliance with the GDPR. Leaving aside the havoc this will play with their ability to access healthcare, how does this play out? Do all the nodes on the blockchain have to agree to roll back their chain and amend the block? In principle this could happen, but it would be a lengthy process, and will put the chain out of action for the duration. And what about subsequent blocks that contain information based on the data in the amended block? Or a computer that was part of the original chain, but has since exited, for whatever reason. It would be impossible to track them down to see if the data is still lurking somewhere on their hard drive. And what happens if the network of blockchain nodes simply refuses? There is nothing really in it for them, after all, and it goes against the spirit of blockchain, which is a fiercely protected thing. Plus, who will the EU or national GDPR enforcers punish? Who are the data controllers and processers now?

Of course, private, permissioned, blockchains are a slightly different matter as it can be easier to gain consensus from the nodes for a deletion. But again, this starts impacting the value of blockchain and its immutability and decentralised nature, as well as raising issues around governance: as accountants, we know that you don’t correct an incorrect debit by deleting it, but rather with a credit.

Alternatively, and maintaining a level of governance, are solutions such as the one Accenture has prototyped that allows blocks to be edited, re-written or removed without breaking the chain. Plus, the edit leaves a “scar” so it is clear that the block has been changed. Accenture argues that the ability to modify the blockchain is required to make it commercially viable. Their prototype, they further argue, doesn’t downgrade blockchain to a regular database though, as organisation still get the benefits of data resiliency, integrity and security supplied by the built-in cryptography. Purists would definitely not agree, and I would have to say that they have a point.

Nevertheless, this is a stark illustration of how regulation and security very often lag innovation, and, if we are not careful, can bog it down or stop it in its tracks altogether. With GDPR still in its infancy, and the plan being to finetune the regulation during the first court cases, I wouldn’t want to be one of the vanguard guinea pig organisations that this gets tested on.

As published in Accountingweb - 28th November 2018

Tuesday, 6 November 2018

IDU's 10th Annual Conference - Futurescapes

On the 28th February and 1st March 2019 Financial Managers, Financial Accountants, IT Managers and Financial Administrators from a wide range of companies, industries and countries will again gather for two full days of conferencing at the 10th Annual IDU User Conference 2019. The conference will be held at the Marriott Hotel, Crystal Towers, Century City, and we expect a record turn out to this event.

Attendees will be introduced to exciting new features and modules of idu-Concept; learn all the tricks and tips to maximise their use of the system and be able to attend in depth training sessions, where delegates can attain full IDU administrator accreditation certificates for topics such as Employee Remuneration Budgeting and Reporting and Analytics.

CEO Kevin Phillips will share the IDU Development Roadmap for 2019, and attendees will be able to provide input to influence the final result.

There will also be one on one access to IDU system experts and one on one meetings with IDU Consultants; exciting expert guest speakers and the chance to network and exchange ideas and best practice learnings with some of the best minds in the business.

The theme for the conference is Futurescapes. In today’s turbulent world, one of the few things you can count on is constant and rapid change. Responsive budgeting and real time access to the numbers ensures your business is able to adapt quickly when necessary.

IDU is constantly striving to innovate its cutting-edge software to provide financial management solutions that keep your business up to date – now and in the future. 

Each year we put together an impressive list of guest speakers. And this one will be no different. We are excited to welcome Sameer Rawjee as the first guest speaker appearing on day 1 of the conference. Sameer built his first Ed Tech company in university, which later became the core technology for a Mark Zuckerburg backed institution. He furthered his studies in Business and Design Thinking at University of Toronto and then went off to work for Google's Headquarters. Sameer founded the Life Design Lab at Google to study Human Purpose at Work, where there are more than 3000 Google employees from more than 50 countries enrolled. He is now the CEO of O School where he helps companies, like Soundcloud and Barclays, design their organizations for The Next Workforce - and where he helps High Schools adopt the Mars Curriculum to prepare their students for the Future of Work.
Registration is now open and there are limited spaces available, so go online to and click on the conference link to reserve your spot today. What’s more, delegates who register and pay before the end of November 2018 will receive a 10% early bird discount.

Wednesday, 17 October 2018

When economic times get tough, resist pulling up the drawbridge

This century has only just become an adult, but has managed to fit in an unprecedented amount of upheaval and disruption. From the September 11 attacks in 2001, through various wars, natural disasters, disease outbreaks and the global financial meltdown and subsequent debt crises. We’ve seen the launch of Facebook, YouTube and the iPhone – and that is just the tip of the technological iceberg that arrived on the scene. Then this year we’ve seen GDPR land, and the Brexit pendulum continues to swing causing the pound to see-saw. And all of that against the backdrop of a Trump presidency that continues to sow uncertainty on a global basis.

Is it any surprise that you might hear the sound of drawbridges being pulled up across the corporate world? Are you feeling the pinch as budgets are being tightened, again, as senior management doubles down on a strategy of retreat, keep your head down, and don’t do anything even vaguely out of the ordinary.

I’d say at this stage we should be used to managing our way and driving our business through this level of global and local disruption and change. We’ve been riding this wave for a while now, and it doesn’t seem like it’s dying out any time soon. We should accept that these crises are becoming the norm and that we need to find a way to navigate through them that positions us for growth and not decline once we emerge on the other side. 
But still, too often the tendency will be to batten down the hatches.

For financial managers this usually means, tightening up on expenses. Actually, that’s putting it mildly. Control gets ratcheted up to 11 and expenses get put under the microscope. Makes sense, right? Actually, not at all, so it’s worth revisiting why this is a very bad idea.

Don’t be tempted to micromanage your way through tough economic patches
One of the most fascinating effects of a recession, or other financial turmoil, is that fear and panic turns leaders, who previously saw their people as valuable team members, into autocrats who fixate on targets and are oblivious to everything else. As a result, spending becomes lean and managers turn into checkbox-ticking watchdogs.

It doesn’t take a HR guru to tell you that this is almost always counterproductive. This is the best way to demotivate a previously well-functioning team, and, demotivated employees are less efficient than their counterparts. I’m not suggesting adopting an indulgent approach when it comes to budgeting and expense management, but to rather take a smart approach.

Instead of tightly controlling your managers, give them control over their individual budgets. After all, only the manager really knows what costs can be effectively cut without having unfortunate consequences down the line. The way to do this successfully has two parts. First, ensure your vision and strategy is both inspiring and realistic, so that the people tasked with implementing it are convinced by it. Next, ensure there is a central, user-friendly space where information can be stored and easily accessed and shared. This probably does not look like an organisation-wide ERP system, which are often too complex for managers to understand. Inevitably misinterpretations arise, or the managers develop a parallel system of their own, somewhat flawed, and definitely out of date, spreadsheets.

Empower your managers with actual performance data that relates to their budget on a daily, not monthly basis. Information is transformative – it is persuasive, it inspires action and it clarifies goals and expectations for everyone. If you want your staff to pull together as a team, especially in tough times – equip with them with the right tools and information to do their jobs.

Now, your team will be empowered to make the decisions that only they are in a position to make, but you still have enough oversight to keep a close eye on the overall financial health and spending of the company. And then, despite any downturn, you’ll have happier, loyal employees; a clear picture of where you are in the world; and the confidence to lower the drawbridge and engage with the world, while your competitors are nailing the shutters into place and becoming a distant memory in the market’s mind.

As published in Accountingweb - September 2018

Wednesday, 3 October 2018

Don't forget about real life intelligence

The unintended consequence of forgetting people in the age of the machines

While there is a fair bit of moral panic over the idea that machines are going to take all our jobs -- some reports say that robots and artificial intelligence will replace almost a third of the workforce in the UK in the next 15 years – today it is more important than ever to keep your people front of mind. Especially when considering recruitment and succession planning.

Previously a wash, rinse and repeat approach was fine: make sure you have enough mini-me managers and leaders moving up through the ranks, and a good supply of top talent at entry level. This has all changed. Today you are recruiting for roles, like data scientists, that have no formal career path. You need to find people who are both comfortable working with machines, and flexible enough to change their roles as the machines get more capable. Despite the headlines, the sweet spot for the foreseeable future is going to be humans and machines working together. This last point became incredibly obvious during Facebook’s last earnings call, where it emerged that the company was hiring more people to filter inappropriate content, to make up for the limitations of artificial intelligence.

Finally, once you’ve hooked top talent with promises of barista coffee and a relaxed dress code in the job spec, you’ve got to keep them hooked. And you don’t do this by making them work in old-fashioned ways. In my world this looks like the way too many companies still do budgeting and forecasting. Usually this is done ineffectively using spreadsheets that get sent around the office like ticking time bombs. The process takes time and is open to errors, thanks to the limitations of spreadsheets compared to better, more up-to-date ways to do this task. This is also typically a top-down process, with finance dictating budget parameters to non-financial managers, so there is little chance for the budget to reflect the realities of the coalface of the business.

Working like this is not going to fly with the next generation. They digitalise and automate things in their day-to-day life, so why should they grapple with spreadsheets or any other out-dated systems, processes and hierarchies in the workplace? And worse, not having the freedom to innovate and fix these anachronisms and inefficiencies.

An example of this conundrum: There's a thread on the Workplace StackExchange site from 2017, where a developer asked for advice on the ethics of them having automated their job. They had been hired full-time to maintain a legacy database using SQL scripts.

The job was pretty boring, and after a year the person had written a program that completed a month's worth of work in 10 minutes. An added complexity is that the analyst who created the spreadsheet in the first place typically spent a fair bit of time verifying the completed work because the task was so mind-numbingly dull that it was easy to make mistakes. So ingeniously, the developer deliberately added a few bugs and errors every month, to make it look like a human did the work. In total, they spent one to two hours a week on what was supposedly a full-time job.

Interestingly, while the advice that followed was mixed, ranging from ‘fess up (and different ways to do this while still keeping their job), to keep doing what you're doing and don’t lose any sleep over it. But, the point most people had an ethical concern with, was the introduction of deliberate errors, which wasted other people's time and created the risk that the errors would not be picked up and so enter the live data.

In this case, the developer is a contractor working remotely, so the time they save is spent on things that are meaningful to them. But similarly, if full-time, on-site employees were empowered to innovate themselves out of their mundane jobs, they would free up their time to do more meaningful, creative, and strategic work in the business. Which is a win for the employee and a double win for the organisation – they keep their good people, and their operations are improved, dramatically.

The developer in the story above is an excellent example of someone who is quite happy working hand-in-hand with machines, plus is flexible enough to shift their role as the machines gain capabilities. Unfortunately, their current employment culture doesn't favour this, and in fact, works against it.

Which is a double whammy for organisations as they start to lose their best recruits, and also start falling behind the digital transformation curve. No number of C-suite appointments will transform your organisation without an influx of the new generation who understand your future market, because they are your future market. For real change, an organisation needs to drive this progress by hiring a lot of people at entry level who understand technology and its impact.

And then, this needs to be underpinned by a shift away from a top-down, command and control leadership culture and hierarchical org chart that is more suited to the industrial revolution and its assembly line. For companies to be nimble and responsive, they need to prioritise transparency, collaboration, trust and the free movement of the information people need to get their jobs done. This will enable better decision making and more ownership through the ranks.

So, it turns out, our machine-filled future is still all about the people.

Thursday, 20 September 2018

Legislating the digital goose

Image result for protection of data

There’s always a fair bit of muddling through during times of massive change, as we see now at the dawn of the fourth industrial revolution. The trick is not to carry over old-school thinking into a new realm and limit your opportunities. I think we are facing a real risk of doing just this, looking at the impact data privacy legislation can have on a company’s ability to transform for a digital future.

A crucial part of digital transformation is doing business in an entirely new way. And the fallout from POPIA and GDPR could limit our ability to build nimble, flexible, digital organisations.

We’ve had to navigate the introduction of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) as well as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the last few months. I think that both these laws, which look at how personal identification data is collected, stored and handled, could have an impact on a company’s ability to succeed in the fourth industrial revolution. Partially because in many cases they are blunt instruments, and also because they don’t always seem to understand the digital landscape.

Of course, I agree that protection of personal data is essential: we’ve seen enough data breaches and unethical behaviour to know that they are a genuine threat. In addition, I, like most of us, am annoyed by constant unsolicited marketing calls and direct mail.

But a couple of things have caused me to raise a sceptical eyebrow and wonder how the outcome of compliance gels with running a future-fit company. For instance, some of the POPIA requirements that have been passed on to us from our clients, include locking down information to such an extent that the only way to do your job is sitting at a desk, in your office. This is completely opposite to a digitally-empowered, mobile, flexible, project-based workplace and the benefits of working in this way. We wouldn’t be able to pull together the best team for the project, or access real-time data via the cloud while on the go. Nor would we benefit from our team bringing their mobile devices into the workplace.

And GDPR has its own red flags, one of them being an individual’s ability to request, within a month, all the personal identification details a company holds on them, and also ask for amends or complete erasure. Think about the logistics of doing that. I’m not even sure it’s entirely possible given the knock-on impact this might have, in a set of reports, for instance. But also, it potentially heralds a return to big slam dunk ERP systems, whether or not they are best for the job, rather than best-of-breed services that do exactly what we need them to do.

While I agree with the need for data security, too many things about these corporate, “belt and braces”, approaches to data protection make me feel like this could be quite a big step back for our digital futures. Perhaps we need a bit more common sense and forward-looking thinking when tackling these challenges.