A client's report had a total that didn't match its own detail. Nobody had caught it. Not because...A client's report had a total that didn't match its own detail. Nobody had caught it. Not because...
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
A client's report had a total that didn't match its own detail.
Nobody had caught it. Not because anyone was careless - checking it by hand meant re-adding hundreds of lines, so nobody ever did.
I re-added them. The gap was ~$83K.
Large enough to distort every pricing decision downstream. Small enough, next to a total that size, that it would never announce itself. It sat among six other lines that reconciled perfectly.
But the finding isn't the point. Findings are one-time.
What I built was the layer that catches that class of error automatically, every period: every stated total re-added from its own underlying detail, and only the mismatches surfaced. 512 lines checked in 4 seconds. One needed a human.
Screenshot below is that layer, running on sample data.
This is the honest case for reconciliation automation. Not tidier spreadsheets. Catching the number that would have cost real money.
What's the most expensive error you've found hiding in a spreadsheet?
Post image
Back to feed
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started