Pigment Implementation: What UK Finance Teams Actually Need to Know
The honest version. Not the sales deck.
You've seen the Pigment demo. The interface looks slick. The scenario modelling seems impressive. Your CFO is asking questions about timelines and costs. And you're trying to work out if this is actually going to make your life easier or just replace one set of problems with another.
We've implemented Pigment for organisations across the UK - insurance businesses, SaaS companies, professional services firms. Some implementations went beautifully. A couple were harder than expected. Here's what we've learned.
What Pigment Actually Is (And Isn't)
Pigment is a cloud-native planning platform. It does budgeting, forecasting, scenario analysis, and reporting. The interface is genuinely good - much more intuitive than Anaplan, more modern than Planful. Finance people can usually build simple models themselves after proper training.
What it isn't: a magic wand that fixes broken processes. If your current planning approach is chaos, Pigment will give you faster, more collaborative chaos. You need to know what you're trying to achieve before the software can help.
The platform is relatively young compared to Anaplan (which has been around since 2006). This means two things. First, the interface benefits from modern design thinking - it doesn't feel like enterprise software from 2010. Second, some enterprise features are still maturing. If you need complex multi-currency consolidation with minority interest calculations across 50 entities, Planful or IBM Planning Analytics might still be the safer bet.
When Pigment Makes Sense
You're drowning in spreadsheets. Your budget is a folder of 47 Excel files. Version control means adding "_v3_FINAL_JD" to filenames. Last month's forecast took three days to consolidate because someone overwrote a formula. Pigment solves this immediately. One model, real-time updates, proper audit trails.
Your team hates the current tool. Maybe you have Anaplan or another EPM system, but adoption is awful. People are exporting to Excel because the interface is painful. Pigment's UX is genuinely better - finance teams actually want to use it. We've seen adoption rates climb dramatically just from the interface improvement.
You need scenarios fast. Board meeting tomorrow, someone wants to see what happens if you cut headcount by 15%. In Excel, that's a day of work if you're lucky. In Pigment, it's fifteen minutes once the model's built. This is where the platform really shines.
You're a SaaS company. Pigment handles recurring revenue models well. ARR tracking, cohort analysis, NRR calculations - these are first-class citizens in the platform. Their pre-built templates for subscription businesses are actually useful, unlike some competitors' "accelerators" that need heavy customisation.
When Pigment Might Not Be Right
This is the bit vendors don't tell you.
You need deep statutory reporting. If your primary pain is IFRS 16 lease accounting or complex intercompany eliminations across dozens of entities, Planful has more mature functionality here. Pigment is catching up, but "catching up" isn't the same as "battle-tested."
You're already successful with Anaplan. If your Anaplan implementation works and people use it, switching to Pigment costs money and disruption for marginal UX gains. Fix what's broken, don't replace what works.
You have massive data volumes. Pigment handles normal FP&A data sizes well. But if you're doing transaction-level analysis across millions of rows with complex allocations, test thoroughly before committing. The platform performs well, but at extreme scale you need to validate, not assume.
Your data is a mess. This applies to any EPM tool, but it's worth saying: if you can't get clean actuals from your ERP today, Pigment won't fix that. You'll just have faster access to garbage data. Fix the plumbing first.
What Implementation Actually Looks Like
Typical timeline for a focused FP&A deployment: 8-12 weeks from kickoff to go-live. That's not a sales number - that's what we've actually delivered. But "focused" is doing a lot of work in that sentence.
Weeks 1-2: Discovery. We map your current process, understand your data sources, define what success looks like. This phase feels slow when everyone's excited to start building, but skipping it costs you later. Every implementation that's gone sideways started with rushed discovery.
Weeks 3-6: Build. Configure the model, set up integrations, build input templates and reports. This is where the actual work happens. Your team needs to be involved - not watching from the sidelines, but actually participating in design decisions.
Weeks 7-9: Test. Run parallel cycles. Your next forecast happens in both the old system and the new one. Find the gaps, fix the issues, build confidence. Don't skip this because you're impatient.
Weeks 10-12: Train and go-live. Hands-on training with real scenarios. Not a webinar, not a recording - actual practice with the tool they'll use every day. Go-live with support standing by.
Total cost varies by complexity, but for a focused scope you're typically looking at £50-80k for implementation, plus Pigment's licensing (usually £50-80k annually for a mid-sized deployment). More complex projects with multiple use cases run higher.
Common Mistakes We See
Scope creep disguised as ambition. "While we're at it, let's also do workforce planning and revenue forecasting and operational KPIs." Now your 10-week project is 30 weeks and nobody remembers what problem you were solving. Start focused. Expand later.
Underestimating data integration. Everyone assumes their ERP will just "connect" to Pigment. Sometimes it does. Often there's manual data prep happening in Excel that nobody mentioned. Budget time for integration properly.
Treating training as an afterthought. A two-hour session before go-live isn't training. Your team needs hands-on practice with realistic scenarios. Otherwise they'll go back to Excel within a month.
Expecting the tool to fix process problems. "Our forecast is always wrong" isn't a technology problem - it's a process and incentive problem. Pigment will give you wrong forecasts faster unless you address the underlying issues.
What to Ask a Pigment Partner
If you're evaluating implementation partners, here's what matters:
"Who actually does the work?" Big consultancies send partners to the sales meeting and graduates to the project. Ask specifically who will be building your model. Ask to meet them before signing.
"Can you show me a similar implementation?" Not a case study PDF - an actual reference call with someone who's been through it. What went well? What was harder than expected?
"What happens after go-live?" Your model will need changes. New cost centres, revised driver logic, additional reports. How do you handle that? Ongoing support should be discussed upfront, not as a surprise invoice later.
"Do you work with other platforms?" Partners who only know Pigment will recommend Pigment for everything. A partner who also works with Anaplan and Planful can give you objective advice about whether Pigment is actually right for your situation.
The Honest Assessment
Pigment is a strong platform that's maturing fast. For many UK finance teams - particularly those in SaaS, professional services, and insurance - it's the right choice. The interface genuinely is better than the competition. Implementation genuinely is faster. User adoption genuinely is easier.
But it's not the answer for everyone. If you need battle-tested statutory consolidation or you're already successful with another platform, there are better paths.
The best way to know? Run a proof of concept with your actual data. Not a demo with clean sample data - your messy, real-world data. See how it handles your specific requirements. That tells you more than any blog post, including this one.
We're a Pigment implementation partner, but we also work with Anaplan, Planful, and IBM Planning Analytics. If you're evaluating platforms or planning an implementation, we're happy to talk through your specific situation - no pressure, just honest advice.