What we doAdvisory & ConsultancyRegulatory Reporting & Disclosures
Returns filed on time, from numbers you stand behind.
In most institutions, regulatory reporting is a monthly act of heroism: data pulled from five systems, reconciled in spreadsheets, re-keyed under deadline pressure by the two people who know how. It works until it doesn’t — a resignation, a new return, a supervisor asking where a number came from. BIZENIUS replaces the heroism with an operating model: lineage from source to submission, controls with owners, and one version of the truth that finance, risk and the supervisor all read.
Where this begins
The pressure points that bring reporting teams to us.
The process is two people deep
The returns go out because the same two people perform the same undocumented sequence every month. Either of them resigning is a regulatory incident waiting for a date.
The supervisor asked where a number came from
Tracing it took three weeks and four systems. The next question will get the same answer — unless lineage becomes part of the process instead of an archaeology project.
Every new return is a project
Each supervisory change triggers months of spreadsheet engineering. The reporting calendar is growing; the method does not scale.
What we deliver
A reporting operating model with owners.
A reporting engagement rebuilds the production line behind the returns — so filing becomes routine, questions get answered from lineage, and new requirements land as configuration, not crisis.
The operating model
Roles, ownership and calendar for every return — who prepares, who controls, who signs, and what happens when a number moves.
Lineage & controls
Source-to-submission lineage for the material returns, with reconciliations and quality controls placed where errors actually enter.
A single version of the truth
The reconciliation spine between finance, risk and regulatory numbers — one set of figures everyone defends, including in front of the examiner.
Production runbooks
The undocumented sequence, documented — so the process survives its authors and new staff produce returns to the same standard.
Disclosure governance
Pillar 3 and public disclosures aligned with the supervisory returns they must reconcile to — governed on one calendar.
How the engagement runs
Diagnose. Design. Build. Embed.
Diagnose
The current production process, return by return — where numbers enter, where they break, and what the supervisor would find.
Design
The target operating model: ownership, lineage architecture, control points, calendar.
Build
With your finance and risk teams — reconciliations, controls and runbooks built into the monthly cycle, not alongside it.
Embed
Two production cycles run by your team with our review — then the model is yours, documented and owned.
Perimeter and fee are fixed at the diagnostic — return by return, starting where the risk is highest.
Asked before engaging
The questions CFOs and heads of reporting put to us first.
Is this a technology project?
Not first. The operating model — ownership, lineage, controls — is advisory work, and it determines what any technology must do. Where automation then pays, our Smart IT practice builds it on the model we designed together; many clients sequence exactly that way. The advisory work stands on its own either way.
How long does this take?
Fixed at the diagnostic, return by return. We start where the supervisory risk is highest — typically the returns with known reconciliation breaks — and the perimeter grows only if you choose to extend it.
Who does the work?
Practitioners who have owned regulatory reporting inside banks — people who have signed returns under deadline, not only reviewed them from outside. No junior consultants.
What do you need from us?
Access to the current production process and the people who run it, the last supervisory correspondence on reporting quality, and a named counterpart in finance or risk. Everything is listed at the diagnostic.
How is confidentiality handled?
Confidential by default. Our published mandates are anonymised to client shape, and nothing about your institution is published without written permission.
The Capability Arc™
This practice is one point on the arc.
Reporting clients usually pair the operating model with the automation that removes the re-keying — and the training that upgrades the team.
Automate it · Smart IT
Reporting Automation & Dashboards
The returns your team re-keys every month, automated with lineage and controls on the model we design together.
Learn it · Training
Advanced Basel III, Stress Testing & ICAAP Masterclass
The regulatory framework behind the returns — so your team reports from understanding, not habit.
The ask
Request a confidential reporting review.
A senior practitioner walks your month-end with the team that runs it — and tells you, privately, where the process would fail an examiner and which single change buys the most safety.
Confidential by default; under NDA on request. A senior practitioner responds within two working days.
Regulatory Reporting & Disclosures
Leave the question with us.
Two lines on the mandate is enough — a senior practitioner replies within one business day.