There are still clients who are absolutely keen on a procedural documentation are extremely few and far between. No wonder, given that they have more than enough on their plates. Yet this is one of those tasks that generates more and more work the longer it is put off. But what arguments really resonate with clients? What are the measurable benefits of a documentation system? And who in the firm should take on the associated tasks? hsp director Paul Liese discussed this with documentation expert Sven Horak, the managing director of vemeto GmbH.
vemeto GmbH specialises in the field of procedural documentation specialises in. Its founder and owner, Sven Horak, first became hooked on the subject in 2019 when his tax adviser introduced him to the topic of documentation. What began as mere curiosity and interest has long since developed into a great passion. This is because Sven sees enormous potential in the field of documentation. The experiences he is now gaining in his day-to-day work confirm this.
When he first set up in business, he repeatedly had to persuade law firms and clients. He argued that documentation should not be seen as an obligation; rather, the focus should be on the potential added value for the firm. Sven usually works for law firms by producing documentation for their clients. Some law firms begin the collaboration by having him draw up their own procedural documentation, so that they can familiarise themselves with the subject matter, Sven’s working methods and the necessary processes.
More and more law firms are recognising the potential
However, Sven also notes that there has been a shift in thinking on this issue over the past few years. Many law firms now reach out to their clients, no longer simply promoting case documentation as a means of self-protection. Furthermore, law firms see documentation as an opportunity to trace every step a document takes, from receipt right through to its entry in the accounts. Moreover, it is not just about document storage, but also covers other areas such as payroll, expense claims and, in particular, IT infrastructure.
Paul notes that the focus of tax audits lies in understanding business processes. The auditors are not initially interested in the filing of supporting documents at all. Sven adds that auditors generally become suspicious if the processes described in the documentation do not correspond to those in reality. Such a procedural documentation It is worthless as a document in its own right, and certainly as a reference work. That is why Sven sees his role as creating business value, not simply producing a document.
Companies need to understand their IT systems
Paul asks what the IT infrastructure documentation is all about. Sven replies that part of it is, of course, hardware documentation. Beyond that, it’s about how different software systems interact with one another. How is the data generated or transferred? What risks are involved when transferring a document from one system to another?
In Sven’s experience, many business owners do not know how their IT processes work. This leads him to wonder how they would be able to plausibly explain, during a tax audit, that their own processes run smoothly and securely. After all, this involves issues such as data loss, manipulation, and so on. Paul explains that interfaces often pose a problem when they fail to transfer certain data correctly. Sven therefore offers his clients data analysis as a service. It is not enough simply to state that interfaces are being used; it is essential to document exactly how the interfaces work in detail.
The documentary offers a wealth of recommendations for action and ideas
The most common reaction to his work is amazement. Many decision-makers believe that everything is running smoothly until they are confronted with the documentation. The clarification and visualisation of reality compels the owners and their teams to take action. Paul wants to know how long it actually takes an expert to compile procedural documentation. Sven replies that he currently needs around 20 hours to complete a documentation project from start to finish. The time required has decreased for several reasons. On the one hand, Sven cites the experience he has gained over the years and through various projects. On the other hand, the tools used are becoming increasingly efficient. However, the time required has nothing to do with the size of the company. Large companies can often have much cleaner and clearer processes in place, and therefore require less effort.
His service does not merely consist of documenting the current situation; a vulnerability analysis is always included. For each vulnerability, the causes are identified and recommendations for action are drawn up. But how does Sven sell his service to clients? Many law firms report difficulties in getting their clients to take an interest in the subject. Sven replies that many law firms try to sell the documentation as a sort of insurance policy against an existing shortcoming. However, in his view, this is entirely the wrong approach. Rather, the aim is to create a central handbook setting out the company’s processes. This would enable new staff, for example, to understand their role within the company at a glance.
In digital tax audits, the documentation of procedures is becoming increasingly important
There is another point that is important to Sven: documentation is not a side issue. Often, the task of documenting procedures is simply handed over to someone else in the firm. However, Sven’s experience shows that staff must be able to devote themselves fully to documentation in order to do the job properly. The workload is enormous. But who should this person be? Paul and Sven agree that, really, the person just needs to be curious and enthusiastic about the subject.
Sven wants to know from Paul how he views the role of procedural documentation in digital tax audits. Paul believes that digital tax audits are the procedural documentation as a basis for even explaining the format in which the data is made available for the tax audit. He then goes on to mention that the audit of ancillary systems is becoming increasingly important. This means that the completeness of the data is essential. Paul never regards the tax audit as the primary objective of procedural documentation. Instead, his focus is always on how external expertise can further optimise the company’s own processes.
German 
English