How e-Payables Can Be
a Bridge to Something Better

The benefits of electronic payables (also known as electronic accounts payable or EAP) have been widely reported, but maybe it is still unclear if, or how, these solutions can help your organization. Setting aside demographics like size and revenue, internal culture can be a key indicator. There are three types of organizations for which ePayables can add value for different reasons. Based on the following, where does your organization fit? Answering this question can help you create an appropriate ePayables business case to sell management on the idea.

Don't forget to subscribe to the blog (no charge) to receive educational content!

Access more resources pertaining to electronic payables/electronic accounts payable (EAP).

The Savvy

Savvy organizations actively focus on electronic payments, and establish effective policies and procedures to support their goal. In a perfect world, everyone would be in this category. As a complement to traditional Purchasing Cards, ePayables act as a bridge to new territory for card program expansion and the purchases typically not allowed on a P-Card. Advantages over ACH payments include the ability to:

better manage cash flow (e.g., consolidated monthly payments to the card/solution provider versus individual payments to each supplier)
earn revenue share

Help your organization bridge together its payment strategy through the inclusion of an electronic payables solution.

The Skeptical

Some organizations, driven by fear, are still reluctant to implement a traditional P-Card program or only use P-Cards on a very limited basis. They favor checks and remain skeptical about electronic payments. ePayables might appeal to them on a psychological level. Management can take comfort in how ePayables support an invoice-based purchase-to-pay (P2P) process like they have always used and simply mean a change in payment method.

In this sense, an ePayables solution can be the bridge for moving an organization forward and away from cumbersome checks. It would signify progress, even if all else remains the same. Down the road, they might be more open to the powerful combination of ePayables and P-Cards.

The Sabotaged

In the minority are organizations lacking in accountability, where employees and management alike might use traditional cards like P-Cards to conduct wasteful shopping sprees to acquire business goods. A discouraged program manager, for good reason, would not be interested in expanding their P-Card program. This is a cringe-worthy example of how lax management can sabotage an organization, but ePayables can provide a bridge back to better organization control over spending.

What About “None of the Above?”

Finally, there are organizations who have determined no need for ePayables because traditional cards work well for them for all kinds of purchases. They have already minimized checks and achieved P2P process efficiencies, so they are savvy as-is. They should keep up the good work and continue to evaluate P2P processes for improvement opportunities.