A financial controller's AI agent training plan follows their responsibilities. For each one (journals, reconciliations, accruals, payment runs, the close) it states what the agent now prepares, what the controller must check, the learning behind it, the practicum evidence, and who signs off. Most controllers certify as operators; those leading a finance-wide agent programme go further.
What is this plan for?
In finance, agents prepare much of the month-end close: they draft journals from source data, reconcile bank and balance sheet accounts, calculate accruals from contracts and purchase orders, and assemble the close checklist. These run at depth 2, where a person posts, or depth 3 for routine journals within tight bounds. Payment runs are depth 4 and held. The controller remains accountable for the numbers and signs the close.
The risk is that a well-prepared close looks complete when it is not. A reconciliation can balance because the agent matched items that should not match. An accrual can be accurate to the contract the agent read, but the contract was superseded. The controller needs to know where to look. The review method is described in how financial controllers review an AI agent's decisions, and the time to competence in how long it takes to train financial controllers to supervise AI agents.
How do you fill it in?
List the controller's real responsibilities in your organisation, one per row. For each, describe what the agent changes, then the single most important check. Keep the practicum evidence specific: "approved 40 held journals during close, none overturned" is evidence; "attended training" is not.
The template
| Responsibility | What the agent now prepares, at what depth | The controller's key check | Learning | Practicum evidence | Signed off by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Certificate, expiry and renewal date:
Approval rights granted after certification:
A worked example
A hypothetical group with three trading companies and a shared finance team. Values are samples.
| Responsibility | What the agent now prepares | The controller's key check | Learning | Practicum evidence | Signed off by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journals | Drafts recurring and accrual journals, depth 2; posts routine prepayment releases, depth 3 | Supporting source opened for any journal above 10,000 | Operator modules on how a governed agent decides and human review | 40 held journals decided during one close; none overturned | Finance director |
| Bank reconciliations | Matches and reconciles, depth 3; holds unmatched items | Unmatched items over 30 days are investigated, not cleared to suspense | Operator module on reading the workspace | Ten held reconciling items resolved with reasons | Pryme assessor |
| Accruals | Calculates from contracts and open purchase orders, depth 2 | Contract source is current; superseded versions excluded | Operator module on keeping knowledge current | Five accruals traced back to the signed contract | Pryme assessor |
| Payment runs | Prepares, depth 4 held | Second approver on runs above 50,000; payee changes verified against the supplier record | Operator module on when something goes wrong | Acted as second approver on two runs during practicum | Finance director |
| Month-end close | Assembles checklist and flux commentary, depth 2 | Commentary explains variances with the controller's own judgement | Foundations and Operator | Close signed with commentary rewritten where needed | Finance director |
Certificate: Certified Pryme Operator, valid 12 months; renewal at month 11 through an update module and quiz.
Rights: approves journals of any value for the three companies; second approver on payment runs; may narrow customer limits for finance agents, not widen them.
The accruals row is the one controllers underestimate. The agent reads whichever contract its sources provide. If a renegotiated contract sits in an inbox rather than the contract system, the accrual is precisely wrong. The controller's check is about provenance: is the source the agent used the sealed system of record, or something forwarded? Once seen in practice, controllers ask the question every month.
Payment runs carry the red line. A supplier's emailed request to change bank details is external, and an external claim cannot authorise a payment. Controllers acting as second approvers must check payee changes against the supplier record, not the email, and practise saying no under deadline pressure. Use how to train financial controllers to spot prompt injection and pressure for that, and calibration sessions for financial controllers to keep group entities consistent. The controller's team will follow plans like the training plan for credit controllers. For the wider sequence, see training teams for AI agents.
Where the Academy fits
Pryme Intelligence Academy certifies the controller through the Operator track, with a practicum on real review decisions signed off by a Pryme assessor. Controllers who lead a regulated, multi-agent finance programme can take the Architect track, which ends in a capstone and a board review with two Pryme assessors and lasts 24 months.
Questions people ask
Should the controller let agents post journals without review?
Only routine journals within bounds the controller set, at depth 3, after the agent's certificate shows it handles them correctly on your own data. Everything else stays at depth 2.
Who reviews the controller's own approvals?
The finance director samples them, and internal audit traces a sample through the record each year. Controllers are reviewers, so they should be sampled like any other.
What changes at year-end?
Nothing in the plan, but schedule renewals away from year-end. A lapsed certificate removes approval rights on the day it lapses, which is the last thing a controller needs in the audit period.