10 key changes moving Accounts Payable from invoice handling to strategic spend management

Accounts Payable is often framed as a problem technology has already solved. OCR captures invoices, approval workflows route them, payments are automated, and month-end closes faster. On the surface, AP looks efficient and under control.

But scale changes everything. As organisations expand across entities, countries, ERPs, and teams, AP becomes less about task execution and more about coordination. Invoices arrive without context, budget visibility lags behind commitments, and approvals slow down across departments. What's more, international requirements add friction to the mix and finance teams end up shifting from proactive oversight to reactive troubleshooting.

Imagine the scenario for a second: A six-figure invoice lands for a subscription someone renewed in a local entity. No request, no budget context, no clear owner. You can’t undo it; you can only chase the story. That’s the moment AP stops being an automation problem and becomes a coordination problem.

The issue isn’t a lack of automation, it’s a lack of orchestration.

To explore why modern AP still breaks at scale — and what needs to change — one of Payhawk's Product Marketing Managers, Kat, sat down with Niki, Payhawk’s General Manager of Accounts Payable.

Watch the full interview

In the video below, Kat and Niki discuss where AP processes break first, why coordination matters more than data entry, how AI agents can reduce friction, and what CFOs should demand from modern AP systems.

Watch now, or read the full article to dig more into the details.

The 10 strategic shifts redefining modern AP

In their conversation, Kat and Niki highlight a key insight: The biggest AP challenges aren’t isolated inefficiencies; they’re structural. As companies expand across entities, geographies, and systems, Accounts Payable becomes central to spend governance, accountability, and financial visibility.

The ten shifts below reflect that reality, showing in detail what separates reactive, fragmented processes from scalable, orchestrated control — and what finance teams must rethink to maintain oversight as complexity grows.

1. AP breaks because of coordination. Not data entry

Most vendors position AP as a data-entry and OCR challenge. In reality, the first thing that breaks as companies scale is coordination.

Adding more suppliers, entities, currencies, departments, and stakeholders exponentially increases complexity. What worked for 100 employees in one country rarely works for 1,000 employees across five.

• Scaling friction is driven by cross-functional misalignment.
• Complexity multiplies with international growth.

Takeaway: Sustainable AP requires structured coordination, not just better invoice capture.

2. Control must start before the invoice arrives

If finance is surprised by an invoice, governance has already failed. Once a contract is signed or a commitment is made, leverage is limited.

True control begins when someone says, “I need to purchase this.” Budget owners and stakeholders should be involved at that stage — not after the fact.

• Governance should start at the request stage.
• Budget accountability must be real-time, not retrospective.

Niki explains:

If the invoice reaches your finance team and they're surprised, it's already too late. Right? So it starts with a very basic sentence: I need to purchase this.

Takeaway: Shift spend control upstream to prevent reactive finance management.

3. Central policy with decentralised execution scales best

Highly centralised AP models create bottlenecks. Fully decentralised processes create inconsistency and risk.

Niki explains: "You want to have a global central process, but you want to have a decentralised execution.”

If I can give an analogy, what finance teams are actually looking for is the cockpit of a fighter jet. Right? So you want to be in a place that gives you ultimate control to execute everything.

Scalable organisations operate with global policies and shared visibility — while allowing local teams to execute within defined guardrails.

• One framework, multiple local executions.
• Visibility for finance, flexibility for teams.

Takeaway: Balance control and autonomy to enable growth without chaos.

4. Automation optimises tasks — orchestration optimises outcomes

Automation improves individual steps, like invoice capture or payment runs. Orchestration connects requests, approvals, payments, and reconciliations into a single continuous lifecycle.

Without orchestration, automation remains fragmented.

• Task efficiency does not equal process coherence.
• End-to-end lifecycle visibility reduces surprises.

Takeaway: Optimize the full procure-to-pay journey, not isolated steps.

5. The hidden cost of AP is leadership distraction

Manual processing costs are visible. Executive escalations are not.

When off-policy spend reaches senior leadership, time is diverted from strategic work to reactive problem-solving. And by then, most financial commitments are irreversible.

• Reactive governance drains executive bandwidth.
• Post-mortems rarely undo financial exposure.

“But the reality is that nobody actually points out the hidden cost of how this is wasting time and resources when it comes to senior-level management, the head of finance, the CFO,” Niki explains. “They're kind of doing the autopsy of the spend. They're trying to understand what happened after it happened.”

And by this point, you're simply "some cost"... And you can't change the decision, you're already in a contract with a supplier, and you need to pay the invoice.

Takeaway: Poor upstream controls silently consume leadership time.

6. Employee experience drives compliance

Accounts Payable is not only a finance process. It involves marketing, legal, IT, sales, and R&D.

If the system is frustrating or unclear, employees delay submissions, provide incomplete context, or bypass the process entirely. Good user experience improves compliance and cycle time.

• Friction reduces adoption.
• Clear, intuitive workflows improve policy adherence.

Takeaway: UX is a compliance lever, not a cosmetic enhancement.

7. AI reduces friction without reducing governance

Traditional intake forms assume employees know exactly what information is required. In reality, they often don’t.

AI-guided workflows can interpret free text, dynamically request missing information, and route requests to the right stakeholders — reducing friction while maintaining control.

• AI can guide rather than block employees.
• Governance can be embedded invisibly into the process.

Takeaway: Use AI to simplify complexity without compromising oversight.

8. International expansion exposes process fragility

Processes that work domestically often fracture internationally. Different ERPs, bank accounts, tax rules, and e-invoicing mandates add operational strain.

If systems cannot support regulatory diversity, additional tools are introduced — increasing fragmentation.

• Regulatory requirements vary across countries.
• Constant system replacement creates instability.

Takeaway: AP architecture must be built for international scalability.

9. Multiple ERPs are common — and manageable

Fast-growing companies frequently operate different ERPs across entities. Full consolidation is expensive and resource-intensive.

An orchestration layer can connect multiple ERPs, preserving flexibility while maintaining centralised oversight.

• ERP consolidation is not always practical.
• Integration can scale better than replacement.

Takeaway: Enable interoperability to support growth.

10. The right metrics go beyond cost per invoice

Cost per invoice is important but incomplete.

Meaningful AP performance indicators include approval lifecycle time, full invoice lifecycle from request to reconciliation, payment cost optimisation (including SWIFT and FX fees), and employee experience.

• Measure speed and accountability, not just processing cost.
• Track transparency in payment and FX fees.

Niki says:

What I would recommend is definitely for people to focus on the approval lifecycle. Understanding the different breakdowns and the bottlenecks in those different processes is actually the holy grail of AP…

Takeaway: Optimise for lifecycle performance and move toward zero-touch approvals and month-end.

From reactive AP to orchestrated control

AP doesn’t break because finance teams lack discipline. It breaks where complexity isn’t connected.

Specifically, it breaks between purchase request and invoice, between departments involved in approvals, between global policy and local execution, and between isolated automation tools and real-world operational scale. When those gaps widen, finance shifts from proactive control to reactive troubleshooting.

Traditional AP solutions automate individual steps — capture, routing, payment execution. But automation alone doesn’t create trust. Trust comes from orchestration: connecting the entire lifecycle from purchase intent through approval, payment, and reconciliation — with context, accountability, and visibility at every step.

Modern Accounts Payable isn’t about eliminating complexity. It’s about handling it without losing control. Automation processes invoices. Orchestration builds trust. Book a demo today if you want to learn more about how to orchestrate your Accounts Payable with Payhawk.