Pre-peak season playbook: Validate now, not later

Here’s what most firms get wrong about pre-peak season: They think it’s time to recover from the extension crunch and mentally prepare for the next busy season. They’re half right.

Year-end already feels packed. You’re wrapping up stragglers from extension season, handling advisory work for year-end planning clients, and trying to catch your breath before the real chaos hits. The last thing anyone needs is another project on the list.

But here’s the reality. The firms that consistently handle busy season without breaking aren’t just preparing in pre-busy season; they are testing. They’re running their accuracy systems through realistic scenarios to see what breaks before the new year pressure removes any flexibility to fix it.

Firms that validate workflows during pre-peak season report 35% fewer workflow-related delays during filing season. That’s not a marginal improvement. For a firm processing hundreds of returns, that’s the difference between controlled execution and barely surviving.

The question isn’t whether you’re prepared for the new year. The question is: How do you know?

The confidence trap

There’s a pattern that plays out before busy season. You look around the office. Processes are documented. The staff is trained. Systems are updated. You think, “We’re ready for the new year.”

But ready based on what? Last year’s experience? This year’s planning meetings? The assumption that if it worked before, it’ll work again?

Here’s what three firms discovered when they actually test their systems in pre-busy season:

• One firm found that two reviewers were independently checking the same items on every return, and each reviewer did not know the other reviewer was doing the same. They were literally doubling their review time because the workflow wasn’t clear about who handled what. That inefficiency was invisible until they processed test returns and measured where time was actually going.
• Another firm discovered their validation system was flagging so many false positives that preparers had learned to ignore the alerts. That’s dangerous. When your team is trained to dismiss error messages because most are wrong, they’ll likely dismiss the real ones too. The software was working, but the calibration wasn’t.
• A third firm realized they had no consistent standard for when a return was “review ready.” Some preparers would send returns with minor questions still unresolved. Others would spend time perfecting details that didn’t matter. The result was inconsistent quality and review bottlenecks that shouldn’t have existed.

None of these problems announced themselves during normal operations. They only surfaced when firms deliberately tested their workflows with realistic scenarios.

Why is the time of the year important?

By the time you get to the validation window, the pace picks up. Year-end planning consumes capacity. Early winter brings the chaos of annual close work and holiday schedules that reduce availability. The new year? You’re already processing returns under deadline pressure.

Pre-peak season is the last window where you have both time and focus. You can run test returns. Measure what happens. Find the problems. Fix them properly. Then test again to verify the fix actually works.

One operations manager described the shift this way: “We used to enter the busy season hoping our workflow would hold up. Now we enter knowing it will. We’ve already proven it. That confidence changes how the entire team approaches filing season.”

By the time peak season arrives, you’re discovering problems while trying to maintain production. During the validation window, you’re finding problems while you still have the bandwidth to solve them correctly.

What to actually test

You don’t need an elaborate testing protocol; just 10 to 15 returns from last year and the willingness to see what breaks.

First, look at how information enters your firm.

Pull out your intake forms and document requirement checklists. Do they reflect what you actually need this year? When information comes in inconsistently with some clients providing PDFs, others sending loose papers, and some emailing spreadsheets with partial data, preparers spend time reconciling format differences before they even start on the actual return. Standardizing inputs during pre-busy season means preparers spend less time translating between formats and more time on meaningful work. This foundation supports your tax return accuracy workflow by ensuring clean data enters the system from the start.

Run a few returns through your intake process. Note where preparers have to stop and ask for clarification. Those stopping points are opportunities to improve the process before peak season multiplies them across hundreds of returns.

Then, test whether your error detection actually works.

You’ve probably got diagnostic tools built into your tax software. Effective error detection for tax firms depends on calibration, not just having the tools.

Pull last year’s returns and process them through this year’s system. What gets flagged? Are you getting alerts on things that don’t actually matter? False positives that train your team to ignore warnings? Or are errors slipping through to final review that should have been caught earlier?

Many firms discover their diagnostics are set too strictly, flagging hundreds of items that aren’t real problems. When that happens, preparers start ignoring all the alerts. The opposite problem when diagnostics are set too loosely means real errors reach final review where they’re most expensive to fix.

Testing in pre-peak season gives you time to adjust the sensitivity and retest until you’re catching real problems without overwhelming your team with noise.

Next, check where returns actually stop moving.

Process your test returns through your complete review workflow. Track where they sit and why. Are returns waiting because no reviewer is available, or are they waiting because it’s unclear who should review them next?

Most firms discover the bottleneck isn’t capacity; it’s clarity. Returns sit because the handoff process isn’t well-defined. A return completes initial prep, but there’s confusion about whether it goes to senior review or partner review. The return sits in a queue while someone figures out the routing.

When you test this during the validation window, you can clarify the decision points. Define which returns go where based on complexity or return type. By the New Year, returns flow through defined paths instead of stopping while someone makes routing decisions.

Finally, validate how your team actually communicates about corrections.

When a reviewer identifies something that needs fixing, does the preparer know exactly what to do?

Test this with your sample returns. Have reviewers mark them up as they would during the busy season. Then look at the feedback. Is it specific enough to enable fast resolution?

Vague feedback such as “check Schedule C” means the preparer has to figure out what the problem is before fixing it. That takes time and often requires another round trip to the reviewer. Specific feedback like “Line 27 cost of goods sold should match QuickBooks account 50100, currently off by $3,200” lets the preparer fix it immediately.

Clear communication standards accelerate corrections. Test whether your team’s current habits actually support that.

What you actually gain

This isn’t about achieving perfection. You’ll still face challenges come the start of your busy season. Clients will still send incomplete information. Staff will still have questions about edge cases. Complex returns will still require judgment calls.

But you’ll handle those challenges differently when your foundation is proven.

When your workflow has been tested, problems don’t cascade. A client’s missing document doesn’t reveal that your entire intake process is broken. A complex return doesn’t expose that your review standards are inconsistent across the team. The stress during the busy season comes from volume, not from discovering your systems don’t work as expected.

Firms that test in the validation window report measurable changes. Review cycles run 30-40% faster during busy season, not because teams are rushing, but because they’ve already eliminated the unnecessary steps and unclear handoffs. One firm saw their average review time drop from 45 minutes to 30 minutes per return. They weren’t working faster. They were working from a system they’d already refined.

Error detection improves too. When diagnostics are calibrated correctly, firms catch 90%+ of errors during preparation instead of final review. That means fewer returns bouncing back and forth between preparer and reviewer.

Staff confidence shifts as well. Teams enter the busy season knowing the workflow works because they’ve seen it work under realistic conditions. Questions that would surface under pressure get answered during pre-peak season when there’s time to explain properly. By busy season, the workflow feels familiar instead of theoretical.

The practical approach

If you’ve never done pre-peak testing, here’s what tends to work.

Week 1: Pull your sample returns; generally, 10 to 15 that represent your typical mix. Process them through your current workflow exactly as you would during the busy season. Don’t clean them up first. Don’t make them easier. Note anything that feels slow, unclear, or inconsistent. Where did you have to stop and figure something out? Where did communication break down?

Week 2: Pick the biggest issue you found and fix it properly. Maybe it’s a validation rule that needs adjustment. Maybe it’s a communication standard that needs clarification. Maybe it’s a handoff process that needs better definition. Focus on one thing and solve it completely.

Week 3: Run the same returns through again with your fix in place. Verify that it actually improved things. Measure whether review time decreased, whether communication was clearer, whether returns moved more smoothly. If the fix didn’t help, adjust and test again.

Week 4: Document what you learned. Update your procedures. Brief your team on what changed and why. Make sure everyone understands the improvements before the busy season arrives.

You don’t have to solve every potential problem before peak season. You just need to prove your foundation works before peak season volume removes your flexibility to make changes.

Modern cloud-based platforms make this testing more efficient than it used to be. You can run parallel workflows without disrupting current operations. But the technology only helps if you actually use the validation window to test. The tools don’t eliminate the need for testing; they just make testing less disruptive.

What happens if you skip pre-peak testing?

The cost of skipping pre-peak testing shows up during your busy season, but it doesn’t announce itself with a clear label.

You see it in review cycles that take longer than expected. In preparers asking questions that should have been answered months ago. In validation alerts that create more confusion than clarity. In the end-of-day conversation that starts with “Why didn’t we figure this out earlier when we had time to fix it properly?”

Firms that skip pre-peak testing don’t fail. They just work harder to achieve the same results. The hours are longer. The stress is higher. The team is more exhausted by the middle of the busy season.

And next year, they have the same conversation: “We really should test our workflow before the busy season.”

The real question

Pre-peak testing isn’t about being thorough for thoroughness’ sake. It’s about being strategic with the time you have.

The question isn’t “Are we prepared?” Everyone feels prepared during the setup period. The question is “How do we know we’re prepared?”

Most firms can’t answer that question until peak season proves them right or wrong. The firms that test during the validation window already know the answer before the busy season starts.

Your choice is straightforward: spend the validation window hoping your systems will hold up, or spend it proving they will.

The firms that scale successfully during pre-peak season don’t work harder during busy season. They work from tax return accuracy workflows they tested and validated months earlier.

You might want to consider which approach makes more sense for your firm.

Common questions about pre-peak season testing

When should we start testing workflows? Start early in the validation window if possible. The extension rush has ended, but year-end planning hasn’t consumed all your capacity yet. You need about 6-8 weeks to test, identify issues, implement fixes, and retest before the pace picks up. Waiting until late in the validation window means you’re rushing the testing process, which defeats the purpose.

How many returns should we actually test? Pull 10-15 returns representing your typical mix. A few straightforward 1040s, some Schedule C businesses, maybe a partnership or two, perhaps a corporate return if that’s part of your practice. You’re not trying to process volume; you’re trying to reveal where your workflow breaks down under realistic conditions. The goal is to see patterns, not to test every possible scenario.

What if we find major issues during testing? That’s exactly the point. Finding problems in fall means you can fix them properly. You have time to adjust validation rules, clarify communication standards, redefine workflow handoffs, and then test again to verify the fixes work. Finding the same problems come the New Year means you’re solving them while trying to maintain production, which is significantly harder. Pre-peak discoveries become immediate fixes. Busy season discoveries become ongoing problems.