- PDF Free Download

Hackett Advisory Webcast How AR Can Show Invoicing Love to AP Bryan DeGraw, Senior Director February 12, 2015

Agenda Who is The Hackett Group? What does AP and AR have in Common? AR Best Practices that can help the AP Process? Benefits and Challenges of Automation Process Considerations 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 7

The Hackett Group Introduction Lifecycle support bringing intellectual capital and seasoned practitioners together to yield sustainable benefits to our clients We are the global leader in operations improvement strategies, implementation knowhow, and G&A agility We address both efficiency and effectiveness improvements to enable strategic business objectives Our insights are fact based, from over 7,500 performance improvement consulting engagements Our Best Practices Intelligence Center is a significant differentiator and enabler. It contains: 20,000+ performance metrics updated annually 1,500+ best practices across 95 business processes 1,000+ best practice-based process maps, requirements and configuration guides 1,000+ case studies, implementation examples and research We deliver results through a global team of senior practitioners using a consistent methodology and best practice-based toolset Hackett Value Grid We help companies establish and implement business performance improvements. 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 8

What do Accounts Payable and Account Receivable have in Common? At first thought.absolutely nothing 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 10

On Second Thought.Let s Consider How Each Team Measures Performance Sample Key AP Performance Metrics: Cycle Times (to process a supplier invoice) On Time Payment Rates First Pass Match Rates Process Cost Cost per Transaction Rework/Error Rates DPO and Weighted Average Payments Made relative to Weighted Average Terms Sample Key AR Performance Metrics: Cycle Times (to generate a customer invoice and to apply a customer payment ) Unbilled Revenue Auto Payment Posting Match Rate Process Cost Cost per Transaction Rework/Error Rates DSO, ADD, and % Payments Received($) to Promised Made($) 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 11

Generating and Delivering Invoices to Customers Electronically is a win-win Best Practice Percent of Customer Invoices Generated Electronically But Manually Distributed (mail, e-mail, manual post to portal) Percent of Customer Invoices Generated And Distributed Electronically (No manual intervention) 95% 98% 34% 45% Peer Group World Class Peer Group World Class This is the solution that drives the greatest benefit! 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 13

Automation improves efficiency and effectiveness of the Customer Billing Process Average Time to Bill (Days from Order Fulfillment to Bill Being Sent) Percent of Customer Invoices Corrected for Billing Errors 2.9 2.7% 2.0 1.4% Peer Group World Class Peer Group World Class Hackett 2014 Finance Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Hackett 2014 C2C Advisory Program 14

Automation Drives Down The Customer Billing Process Costs $7.83 $2.40 $1.24 $1.11 0% 1% - 25% 26% - 75% Greater Than 75% Customer Bills Generated and Distributed Electronically Source: Hackett FN Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 15

Customer Billing Automation is also correlated to improved receivables management metrics Average Days Delinquent correlated with percent of automated customer invoicing 16 9 Days Invoice Automation Scale: 14 None = 0% Low = 1-25% Medium = 26-75% High = >75% 10 7 None Low Medium High Source: 2014 Hackett Finance Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 16

World Class organizations reflect higher levels of automation in the Accounts Payable Process Percent of electronic supplier/vendor invoices Percent of Electronic AP Payments 87% 56% 68% 22% Peer Group World Class Peer Group World Class Source: Finance 2014 Functional Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Business Advisory Services 17

Receiving Supplier Invoices Electronically Drives Down the AP Process Cost per Invoice Accounts Payable Process Cost per Supplier invoice $8.49 $5.87 $3.59 $1.54 0% 1% - 25% 26% - 75% Greater Than 75% Electronic invoices as a percent of total transactions Source: Hackett FN Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 18

Increasing AP Automation for Payments Also Drives Cost Savings (AP Process Cost - Electronic Vs. Manual Payments) The data clearly highlights the cost opportunities of electronic transactions The significant aspect is that World-Class organizations who implement payments via electronic mode have still a lower cost per payment than World-Class organizations who have manual payments. AP Process Cost Per Electronic Payment AP Process Cost Per Manual Payment $32.90 $39.52 $36.96 $22.26 Peer Group World Class Peer Group World Class Source: Finance 2014 Functional Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Business Advisory Services 19

World-Class organizations are partnering with Suppliers to receive payments electronically Percent of customer remittances that are electronic Automatic remittance posting match rate 66% 65% 86% 43% Peer Group World Class Peer Group World Class The Cash Application process challenge is not just payment automation but also electronic receipt of remittance advice (coupled is ideal) Hackett 2014 Finance Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Business Advisory Services 20

Receiving Customer Payments Electronically Drives Down the Cash Application Process Cost per Remittance $6.44 Cash Application - Process Cost per Remittance $5.27 $3.47 $1.26 0% 1% - 25% 26% - 75% Greater Than 75% Cash Remittances that are Electronic Source: Hackett FN Benchmark 2014 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 21

Cash Remittance Automation Improves Cycle Times Which in turn has a positive influence on Working Capital Average Time to Apply Cash Correlated with Average Days Delinquent 12 7 9 4 4 2 Percentile 25 Median Percentile 75 Percentile 25 Median Percentile 75 1-2 Day(s) Up to one Day @OPENSCAN #OPENUP2014 2013 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited.

Almost Three Quarters of Organizations Have A Goal of Achieving a Paperless Environment Process Automation Practices (Percent of all Participants) 74% 60% Organization has a goal of achieving a "paperless" environment 49% 25% 23% Invoice data is validated for errors or missing information prior to passing to the accounts payable application Recurring payments are setup in system for automatic approval for payment if within preapproved limits Organization is pursuing a strategy to replace the use of EDI via VAN with newer forms of Internet-based electronic networks Organization has online check request capability 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 24

AP s Perspective - Driving Supplier Adoption to an Electronic Strategy is the Biggest Hurdle Organizations Face Barriers to e-invoicing and e-payment Adoption 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 25

AP's Perspective: Fee Structure and Supplier Enablement Capabilities of Provider Will Also Likely Impact Supplier Adoption Success Fee Structure for Electronic Invoicing How Beneficial were the Supplier Enablement Services of Provider? 36% 14% Our organization pays all the fees Fees are split between suppliers and company 29% Moderately Useful 29% 21% Suppliers pay all the fees There are no fees 71% Minimum Useful 54% of Organizations Leveraged Supplier Enablement Services Hackett AP Performance Study, 2008 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 26

Buyers and Suppliers must be equal partners in the process Buyers need to treat their suppliers as partners in the EIPP or other forms of invoice and payment automation solution Buyers (AP) must communication the benefits of automation solutions to suppliers (AR) in the following ways: Increased visibility / predictability to payment receipt Resolve exceptions collaboratively with buyers online Checking invoice status and payment details in real-time 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. Inquiry Response 27

Automation reaps benefits but AR can benefit further by understanding the needs of the AP payment process The AP Buy/Pay Process Buy Considerations How will needs for goods/services be communicated (requisitioned)? Are reviews and approvals required? Should the Buy be supported with a Purchase Order? Are Receipt Acknowledgements Required? Pay Considerations How will payments be triggered? Are supplier invoices required? What controls are required? What matching requirements are necessary to manage risks? Are you providing what your customers need in order to pay you on time or resolve a dispute in your favor? 2015 The Hackett Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this document or any portion thereof without prior written consent is prohibited. 29

AP is requesting more ways to receive bills Increased requests to send bills to AP Systems AP is sending payments through multiple channels EDI WIRE AP is sending de-coupled (naked) electronic payments = =?

I. Understand your customer s expectations II. III. IV. Provide your customers with choices Integrate with AP systems Create efficiencies in accepting payments

Phone IVR Online Portal (EIPP) Email Consolidator Sites Fax Collection Systems (API) Print & Mail AP Systems

Inefficient Ways to Process Receivables: Lockbox processing In-house processing Manual electronic payment processing Technology Helps World-Class Corporations Achieve: Savings 100% elimination of data entry costs 50-75% resource reallocation 70% reduction in exceptions 1-3 days receivables outstanding reduction Process Improvements Cash application Deduction management Collections More timely and accurate data into ERPs

Why the slow adoption? Coupled payments and remits don t follow a standard and are not human-readable. Heavy IT overhead to map EDI820s. Processed manually. Most remits are decoupled from the payment. Apply technology to: Automate the ingestion of EDI820 s and decoupled remits. Intelligently match and correct data before it flows into the ERP. Process all payments in the same workflow. Eliminate the majority of the manual tasks done today.

I. Provide a range of integrated paper and electronic invoice presentment channels II. Integrate into leading AP Systems III. Open API to support linkage with other applications IV. Best in breed integrated presentment and payment portals V. Automated Cash Application across payment methods