Most CFOs want to scrap quarterly guidance pronouncements, according to a recent survey by Financial Executives International (FEI) and Baruch College's Zicklin School of Business. An overwhelming majority (81%) believe that this practice monopolizes management's time and takes it away from more value-added strategizing and other, more critical responsibilities. Ultimately, CFOs and other financial experts argue that the practice plays into the hands of hedge funds and private equity firms by bringing unnecessary volatility to share prices and corporate market capitalizations.

It also puts CFOs on the hot seat. A company that fails to manage market expectations to the penny risks watching its share price pummeled for the slightest discrepancy–sometimes either way. Too often CFOs have been the fall guy, being sometimes forced to resign over a miss. "We've seen companies–and their CFOs–taking severe hits in the past few years after missing forecasts," says Fritz Roemer, who heads up the enterprise performance management executive advisory program at benchmarking consultants The Hackett Group. "Stock prices become unstable and valuations drop dramatically."

Finance executives are not alone in their disgust. No less than Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and a former head of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have called for an end to this practice. "Quarterly guidance is at best a waste of resources and, more likely, a self-fulfilling exercise that attracts short-term traders," according to a report by a panel chaired by ex-SEC chairman William Donaldson. Despite the fact that half of U.S. listed public companies still make a stab at providing investor guidance, opponents like the Conference Board note that the practice is banned in most other countries.