Spreadsheets can't keep up with the demands of the revised FRS 102 standard. Here's why finance teams are shifting to purpose-built software for compliance, audit efficiency, and real-time oversight—before the 2026 deadline hits.
Speakers in the recent FRS 102 broadcast agreed that manual spreadsheets are reaching their limit. A single file can handle a modest portfolio, but once contract volumes hit the hundreds—each with its own rent review, break option, and index-linked uplift—links multiply, formulas break, and version control takes more time than the calculations themselves.
The revised standard increases the burden: every rent-free period, modification, or early termination now triggers an immediate remeasurement, not just an end-of-year clean-up. Rebuilding schedules every time a landlord agreement changes adds to the workload and increases the risk of misstatements.
Auditors, confronted with a maze of cell references and no built-in audit trail, request detailed support schedules, lengthening fieldwork and raising fees.
In earlier IFRS 16 projects, teams that stuck with spreadsheets reported late journal corrections and restatements. Those experiences highlight why a different approach is necessary ahead of the 2026 deadline.
A specialized platform addresses those shortcomings at every level. First, it stores every contract in a single searchable repository, with each journal line posted to the ledger linking directly to the specific clause that generated it—providing auditors with a clear chain of evidence.
Second, optical character recognition extracts start dates, payment schedules, and escalation terms, while machine learning checks flag missing discount rates or duplicate IDs before the data reaches the general ledger.
In the broadcast, it was noted that this automated capture reduced data entry by roughly 80% and cut data extraction time from weeks to days. Third, the system recalculates right-of-use assets and liabilities as soon as terms change, then pushes postings straight into the ERP—keeping every entity aligned on the same logic.
Dashboards that group commitments by region, maturity band, and asset type give finance teams visibility into future cash flows and covenant headroom, while property teams track occupancy costs in real time—strengthening their position in landlord negotiations.
Read-only auditor access minimizes follow-up questions and shortens the close timeline.
Migration doesn’t have to disrupt daily reporting. Start with a data health check: list every asset and equipment lease, close obvious gaps, and standardize naming conventions.
Load a representative sample into the new platform, reconcile opening balances with spreadsheet figures, and then import the rest in phases—starting with high-value contracts and moving to smaller items later—so monthly closes continue smoothly.
Staff who once built formulas now review exception reports, approve system-generated journals, and monitor alert dashboards. A brief orientation session supported by process guides ensures time savings are realized.
Budget planning should factor in license fees, integration work, and, if needed, temporary analysts for data collection. Broadcast participants emphasized that under-resourcing was a major reason IFRS 16 projects were delayed.
Involving procurement and operations early on helps surface leases that might otherwise be missed, while giving auditors access once the first data set is live helps build trust in the new system.
Every point raised in the broadcast leads to a clear recommendation: move lease data into purpose-built software well before the first FRS 102 reporting period.
By replacing fragile spreadsheets with an integrated platform, finance teams gain automated calculations, traceable audit evidence, and real-time visibility into future commitments—proven benefits that ease year-end pressure and support better property decisions long after compliance is achieved.