paperless ap automation

Accounts Payable: Strategies for Success

Outsourcing, Automating, and Streamlining

December 2006

http://www.aberdeen.com/common/send_to_friend.asp?cid=3714


A/P Strategies for Success

All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. Aberdeen Group • i

Executive Summary

This report is an All Points Bulletin to A/P Managers and their Finance and Procurement superiors everywhere. 2007 is your year to begin the transformation of this traditional, back-office function. Best in Class enterprises are already employing a series of “Success Strategies” to accelerate the process. These strategies include moving to a shared ser-vices structure, investing in automation and/or moving to outsource some or all of this function. Leading enterprises have already begun this transformation and are extending process efficiencies and strategic focus to this latter part of the source-to-settle process.

Key Business Value Findings More then ever, enterprises are seeking new ways to drive savings to their bottom line and process efficiencies across the organization. A/P managers now have an opportunity to accelerate down the path recently blazed by procurement organizations, who have, in large sum, automated their processes and created strategic value, all while elevating the organization’s profile within the enterprise. And, while the vast majority of A/P depart-ments remain mired in a manually-intensive, thoroughly paper-based world, Best in Class enterprises are ready and willing with payables. These leaders are hyper-efficient in processing invoices and have been able to optimize cash flow while building and main-taining strong supplier relationships. Many enterprises indicate that automating all or part of its A/P operations is the key enabler; some see organizational realignment as a first step; others still, are jump-starting the transformation by outsourcing all or part of the function. No matter the strategy, what is clear is that A/P departments that do nothing for another year will continue to lose ground to the competition. Key findings in this bench-mark include:

• Outsourcing is a leading strategy

o Enterprises that outsource reported cost savings approaching 10% for all invoice processing

o 20% of enterprises currently outsource some part of their A/P operations

o Another 15% intend to outsource in the near-term

• A/P Automation offers compelling returns but is not widely adopted

o Paper invoices cost between 68% - 76% more to process (Table 1)

o 22.7% of invoices are received electronically

o 35.4% of invoices are paid electronically

Though leading enterprises have proven the benefits of A/P outsourcing, automation, or some combination of the two, the average A/P group struggles to gain management sup-port for investment in program improvement and fails to move its resources away from


All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. ii • Aberdeen Group

strictly tactical activities and discover the strategic value a Best in Class operation can deliver.

Table 1: Average Invoice-Processing Cost – Electronic vs. Manual

Invoice Type Electronic –

Cost to Process Manual –

Cost to Process

PO $12.79 $22.52

Non-PO $11.92 $20.39

Other $12.78 $21.44 Source: AberdeenGroup, December 2006

Implications & Analysis • Best in Class companies util-

ize automation and outsourc-ing as their primary enablers for value creation within the accounts payable function

• Best in Class companies re-port improved cash flow visibility, strengthened sup-plier relations, among other strategic benefits as a result of their focus on A/P trans-formation

• Best in Class companies are 100% more likely to have incorporated some level of outsourcing into their A/P Success Strategy, possibly because their cost saving target to outsource was nearly half that of their peers

• Best in Class companies are 25% more likely to be working in a shared services center

Recommendations for Action Aberdeen recommends the following A/P Strategies for Success:

• Clearly define the scope and processes of the A/P function – By better defin-ing the scope and processes of an accounts payable department, managers will improve the operational effectiveness of the group while gaining better visibility into transactions, compliance, and process; Managers must also work aggres-sively to ensure that A/P is fully integrated into the source-to-settle process.

• Invest in A/P Automation – While the transactional savings alone can pay for this investment, benefits also include better integration to financial systems, im-

“Invoice visibility is actually quite valuable to strategic sourcing initiatives. Specifically, an invoice review can help identify com-plementary goods & services (that would be missed by a standard category or spend analysis) that can be sourced from the same supply base. It’s rarely done since so few companies have a decent handle on their invoices” – Director, Strategic Sourc-ing Consultancy


All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. Aberdeen Group • iii

proved process cycle times, stronger financial controls, better compliance mechanisms, and improved cash flow visibility.

• Assess Outsource Opportunities – Best in Class enterprises employ outsourc-ing as a fundamental strategy to enhance current capabilities and affect a broader more rapid transformation. Since most enterprises lack any visibility into A/P transactions and process, Best in Class companies, have, on average, a savings threshold to justify outsourcing that is 83% lower than their peers.



All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. Aberdeen Group

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................. i Key Business Value Findings.......................................................................... i Implications & Analysis ...................................................................................ii Recommendations for Action..........................................................................ii

Chapter One: Issue at Hand.................................................................................1 Saving the Rainforest, One E-Invoice at a Time ............................................ 2

Chapter Two: Key Business Value Findings ........................................................4 The Check is in the Mail ................................................................................ 5 Best in Class: Ready, Willing, and Payable ................................................... 5 Automating and Outsourcing ......................................................................... 6

Chapter Three: Implications & Analysis...............................................................8 Strategies for Success................................................................................. 10 KPIs by Company Size ................................................................................ 12

Chapter Four: Recommendations for Action ...................................................... 13 Laggard Steps to Success........................................................................... 13 Industry Average Steps to Success ............................................................. 14 Best in Class Next Steps ............................................................................. 14

Author Profiles....................................................................................................15

Appendix A: Research Methodology .................................................................. 16

Appendix B: Related Aberdeen Research & Tools .............................................18



All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. Aberdeen Group

Figures

Figure 1: Main Pressures Driving A/P Outsourcing ..............................................1

Figure 2: The A/P Paradox ...................................................................................3

Figure 3: Invoice-Processing Costs – Best in Class Advantage ...........................5

Figure 4: KPIs by Enterprise Size ...................................................................... 12

Tables

Table 1: Average Invoice-Processing Cost – Electronic vs. Manual ..................... ii

Table 2: A/P Automation – Which Processes Are Currently Automated?..............2

Table 3: A/P Performance Metrics – How Do You Compare?...............................4

Table 4: A/P Advantage (Best in Class vs. Others)...............................................6

Table 5: A/P Outsourcing Challenges ...................................................................7

Table 6: A/P Excellence Competitive Framework .................................................9

Table 7: Plans for Automation and Outsourcing ................................................. 10

Table 8: Competitive framework .........................................................................17


All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. Aberdeen Group • 1

Chapter One: Issue at Hand

Key T

akea

ways

• Accounts Payable departments continue to operate on the fringe of the Source-to-Settle process, lacking true alignment with either finance or procurement.

• Automation is sorely lacking ; “inefficient” and “paper-laden” are the defining characteris-tics of the A/P function within most enterprises.

• Resources are non-strategic, trapped at the transaction level, with little or no visibility into the valuable pay and supplier data that is processed by the department.

• Collaboration with internal stakeholders and suppliers is reactive at best and almost al-ways very costly and ineffective.

ong trapped in the untended land between procurement and finance, the average accounts payable department lacks automation, executive focus, and general alignment with the enterprise. For most enterprises, the A/P function is not viewed as a vital component of a holistic source-to-settle process, but rather, a necessary

and highly tactical “evil” at the end of a supplier transaction. And, with paper accounting for approximately 80% of all transaction ns, A/P department resources buried under an avalanche of paper have limited opportunity and limited ability to make their case for investment in the function and thereby execute a strategy for success.

However, hope is not lost, as leading procurement and finance executives who have spent the past half-decade radically improving procurement operations, view A/P as the next field to harvest for process efficiency and the next function to gain strategic alignment with the enterprise. These executives are overhauling the function by redefining the de-partment’s mission, restructuring the organization, investing in automation, and in many cases, outsourcing.

Figure 1: Main Pressures Driving A/P Outsourcing

L

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Lack of in-house A/P technology

Improve source-to-settle process

Reduce IT systems costs

A./P is NOT a core competency

Reduce headcount

Lower transaction costs


All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group © 2006. 2 • AberdeenGroup

Source: AberdeenGroup, December 2006

Saving the Rainforest, One E-Invoice at a Time

With thousands, often tens of thousands of invoices received each month, it is shocking that nearly 80% of invoice activity is paper-based. And while increased adoption rates of elec-tronic payment formats like EDI, p-cards, ACH, and wire transfer have certainly saved a few trees in recent years, a very deliberate plan is required to effectively transform an anti-quated A/P department into an efficient “21st century” func-tion. Technology holds the key for many as 23% of those sur-veyed intend to begin the transformation by utilizing tech-nologies such e-invoicing, imaging, and p-cards among others over the next 12 months. An additional 15% of enterprises will tackle both the paper and staffing challenges head on as they look to outsource all or part of the A/P function in the near term.

Table 2: A/P Automation – Which Processes Are Currently Automated?

Process % Automated Check printing 58%

Payment scheduling 46%

Purchasing cards 46%

T&E management 45%

Payment status tracking 41%

Receipt of invoices (XML, EDI) - enable electronic invoices 35%

Coding, tax, and verification 33%

Expense coding accuracy and automated GL policy based coding of invoices

31%

Competitive Framework Key

The Aberdeen Competitive Framework defines enter-prises as falling into one of the three following levels of practices and performance:

Laggards (30%) — prac-tices that are significantly behind the average of the industry

Industry Average (50%) —practices that represent the average or norm Best in Class (20%) —practices that are the best currently being employed and significantly superior to the industry norm

“We view payables as a huge opportunity to bring cost savings to the bottom line. Phase I is a move to a shared services structure to gain alignment with our business partners. Phase II will be an RFP to outsource most of the function.” – Controller, Financial Services Firm



Other disbursement 31%

Automation of header data validation/duplicate invoice verifi-cation

30%

Digital signatures for invoice approvals 27%

Contract repository and management system 26%

Invoice deduction/chargeback system 21%

Online cataloging of header and disbursement info 21%

Invoice receipt summary (i.e. amount due, vendor) level Opti-cal Character Recognition (OCR) scanning of paper invoices

20%


That only a few processes within A/P have been automated by at least 40% of enterprises in this benchmark harkens back to the not too distant past of procurement where brutal inefficiency was the norm and automation was the vanguard. Additionally, a full 28% of enterprises report a complete absence of automation within the A/P department; many of these same enterprises report no plans to automate in the near future.

Figure 2: The A/P Paradox

Internal & external service support

A/P Department: Tactical function at key convergence point for Procurement, Finance, and Suppliers

Reconciliation & approvals

Invoice receipt & handling

Settlement including confirmation and reporting

Disbursement scheduling

A/PDepartment

SuppliersDeliver goods and servicesInvoice & receive payment

Procurement Finance

Spend under ManagementSource to Settle Process

KeyA/P

Processes

Financial Reporting Cash Flow Visibility

ContractsSOX

Compliance

Internal & external service support

A/P Department: Tactical function at key convergence point for Procurement, Finance, and Suppliers

Reconciliation & approvals

Invoice receipt & handling

Settlement including confirmation and reporting

Disbursement scheduling

A/PDepartment

SuppliersDeliver goods and servicesInvoice & receive payment

Procurement Finance

Spend under ManagementSource to Settle Process

KeyA/P

Processes

Financial Reporting Cash Flow Visibility

ContractsSOX

Compliance




Chapter Two: Key Business Value Findings

Key T

akea

ways

• A/P Automation delivers compelling transaction cost savings and other strategic benefits, yet, only one-third of companies have any significant level of automation in place.

• Enterprises that outsource the A/P function perform better in several key metrics than those that keep the function in-house; for example, invoice-processing savings ap-proaches 10%.

• Best in Class enterprises significantly outpace their peers on all KPIs.

ore then ever, enterprises are seeking new ways to drive savings to their bottom line and process efficiencies across their organization. And while many have realized the strategic value that a Best in Class procurement organization can

deliver, most have been slow to identify similar opportunities within Accounts Pay-able. Sitting as it does between, but not with, two mainstay enterprise functions, A/P departments are largely out of sight and out of mind. Though gaining enterprise mindshare and visibility presents steep challenges, Best in Class companies are ris-ing to meet these challenges and overcoming many, as they utilize several basic strategies for success.

Table 3: A/P Performance Metrics – How Do You Compare?

Performance Area Average Result Invoice processing cost (all invoice types) $21.86

Days Payable Outstanding 39.9 days

Exception rate 7.8%

Time to process invoice and schedule payment 19.3 days

Payments made on-time 69.9%

On-time payments that earn discount 51.3%

Invoices received electronically 22.7%

Payments settled electronically 35.4%


M



The Check is in the Mail The odds are that when your customer tells you that the “check is in the mail,” he/she is really telling the truth. Unfortunately the joke, as it were, is on both the customer and the seller since on average, 65% of payments are made manually and the cost to cut and re-ceive live checks is significant when compared to electronic payments.

Best in Class: Ready, Willing, and Payable While the vast majority of A/P departments remain mired in a manually-intensive, thor-oughly paper-based world, Best in Class enterprises are ready and willing when it comes to payables management. These leaders are hyper-efficient in processing invoices and have been able to optimize cash flow while building and maintaining strong supplier rela-tionships. Many enterprises indicate that auto-mating all or part of its A/P operations is the key enabler; some see organizational realign-ment as a first step; others still, are leap-frogging the transformation process by out-sourcing all or part of the function. Best in Class enterprises outperform all by a signifi-cant margin across all KPIs (Table 3), however none is more telling than the invoice process-ing advantage shown in Figure 2.

Figure 3: Invoice-Processing Costs – Best in Class Advantage

Laggard - $64.97 per invoice

Average - $11.50 per invoice

Best in Class - $2.00 per invoice$-

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

Invo

ice

Proc

ess

Cos

t

Laggard - $64.97 per invoice

Average - $11.50 per invoice

Best in Class - $2.00 per invoice$-

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

Invo

ice

Proc

ess

Cos

t


“Supplier enablement is not a big challenge for our clients. We offer to pay each supplier that signs up three days earlier than currently pay them. Very few decline this of-fer.” - CEO, A/P Outsourcing Pro-vider



Table 4: A/P Advantage (Best in Class vs. Others)

Performance Area Best in Class All Others

Invoice processing cost (all invoice types) $2.00 $27.15 Exception rate 3.6% 8.6% Time to process invoice and schedule payment

8.3 Days 22.9 Days

Payments made on-time 74.3% 68.5% On-time payments that earn discount 58.5% 47.2% Invoices received electronically 26.5% 21.2% Payments settled electronically 40.5% 34%


Automating and Outsourcing Enterprises that automate the function see almost instant savings, while those that out-source their A/P operations see an additional 8% in overall savings from invoice proc-essing alone. While significant benefits await those that outsource the A/P process, A/P managers struggle to make the business case because they:

• Lack understanding of the solution provider landscape • Have poorly defined procedures and an inadequate definition of the depart-

ment’s scope • Lack visibility into operations that can help “prove” the case and • Lack executive engagement that could sponsor investment in this area.

Additionally, the perceived loss of control over cash flow management and key supplier relationships are additional gaps that must be bridged. Yet, a growing number of enter-prises understand that an outsourcing strategy is one that can and should be used to en-hance current capabilities.

“With no view into many categories of spend and their associated payments, our CFO insti-tuted a p-card program about 18 months ago. The current policy is for every new employee to be given a card. Six months ago, our CFO determined that the card program presented sig-nificant risk from employee fraud and instituted an audit program. The problem is that our card provides only Level 1 information. After three months, the audit had only uncovered one item of questionable origin (an $84 fruit basket). Is invoice detail helpful? Absolutely, but without Level 3 data, there’s not much we can do.” – A/P Manager, Texas-based refinery



Table 5: A/P Outsourcing Challenges

Challenges % Selected Finding the right solution provider 48%

Getting the right structure and procedures in place to manage outsource solution provider(s)

48%

Inadequate understanding of current spend and payables 32%

Fear of losing control over cash flow management 28%

Fear of losing control over supplier relationships 25%

Education - benefits and costs are unclear 24%

Inability to build support from key stakeholders (e.g., business units, functions or geographies)

24%




Chapter Three: Implications & Analysis

Key T

akea

ways

• Best in Class companies utilize automation and outsourcing as their primary enablers for value creation within the accounts payable function.

• Best in Class companies report improved cash flow visibility, strengthened supplier re-lations, among other strategic benefits as a result of their focus on A/P transformation.

• Best in Class companies are 100% more likely to have incorporated some level of out-sourcing into their A/P Success Strategy, possibly because their cost saving target to outsource was nearly half that of their peers.

• Best in Class companies are 25% more likely to be working in a shared services center.

ased upon their performance in the key areas described in the previous chapter, research participants are segmented into three general categories: Laggard, Indus-try Average, or Best in Class. Best in Class enterprises are defined by unique traits such as organizational structure and inclination to employ technology. Ta-

ble 3 segments A/P Organizations based on the characteristics they have across four categories that are required for effective A/P management:

• Process – The level of process and scope the A/P department has defined for their current processes.

• Organization - Organizational structure, skills, and alignment with the comple-mentary function within the enterprise. Additionally, the inclination and/or ca-pability to leverage outside support or outsource certain areas within the group

• Knowledge – Program visibility into KPI’s - DPO, exception rate, cost of in-voice-processing, and other key measures.

• Technology – Level of A/P automation and how well it is integrated to support the broader “Source-to-Settle” framework and all Supplier Management initia-tives.

We believe that all readers can use this framework to more specifically assess their own organization’s payables competence and to determine the actions they must take to im-prove their overall performance.

B



Table 6: A/P Excellence Competitive Framework

Laggards Industry Average Best in Class Process

• Defined by narrow invoice handling and payment proc-essing activities

• Enterprise does not associate A/P with financial processes

• Enterprise does not associate A/P with source-to-settle processes

• Some level of proc-ess standardization

• Some visibility into process

• Cohesive part of the broader source-to-settle process

• Process compliance is actively managed

• Uniform processes mapped to technol-ogy

Organization • A/P lost in an enter-prise netherworld

• Highly decentralized and silo’d resources

• Resources focused on transaction proc-essing

• Supplier problems are inherited

• Limited oversight by finance

• Limited communica-tion from procure-ment

• Shared services center

• Strong working rela-tionship with fi-nance, procurement and the business customers

• Frequent and posi-tive collaboration with suppliers

Knowledge • No visibility into process

• No visibility into payments and cash flow

• Lack knowledge to make business case for transformation

• Some KPIs are measured

• Best practices are not widely shared nor employed

• Visibility into per-formance

• Willingness to look outside the enter-prise to acquire new skill-sets and knowl-edge, via training, outsourcing, or third-party services



Laggards Industry Average Best in Class Technology • No technology util-

ized within the A/P Function

• May occasionally utilize electronic disbursement

• Does not utilize supplier networks or enablement ser-vices

• Some A/P automa-tion

• Some suppliers enabled

• complementary technologies in place

• Tight integration to other supply man-agement technolo-gies

• High number of suppliers enabled supplier networks

• Likely to utilize sup-plier enablement services or other services as needed

• Integration to finan-cial systems


Strategies for Success Enterprises that outsource, automate or employ some combination of the two stand well ahead of their peers as they have realized greater transactional savings, driven process efficiencies, improved internal and external collaboration, and are in better position to proactively manage their business. A/P managers are increasingly aware that many of the near term opportunities for improvement lie outside the enterprise (Table 7).

Table 7: Plans for Automation and Outsourcing

A/P Automation A/P Outsourcing Process % Selected Process % Selected

Receipt of invoices (XML, EDI) - enable electronic invoices

33% Document archiving (scan-ning/imaging) 20%

Digital signatures for invoice approvals

32% Invoice entry 18%

Invoice receipt level Optical Character Recognition (OCR) scanning

31% Invoice routing/workflow manage-ment

18%

Automation of header data validation/duplicate invoice verification

26%

OCR scanning

18%



Payment status tracking 25% Document scanning/imaging for data capture and invoice process-ing 17%

Detailed (line item capture) through OCR scanning

24% Invoice reconciliation 17%

T&E management 23% Invoice receipt and sorting 16%

Coding, tax, and verification 23% Outsource by payables type - PO invoices 16%

Expense coding accuracy 23% Payment processing/disbursement 16%

Contract repository and man-agement system

22% Outsource by payables type: Non-PO Invoices 14%

Purchasing Cards 21% P-Card administration 13%

Payment scheduling 20% Travel and expense management 12%

Cataloging of header and dis-bursement info

19% All A/P operations 10%




KPIs by Company Size While there are a wide range of key performance indicators available to measure A/P per-formance, the size and breadth of a department must be considered to enable effective benchmarking (Figure 4).

Figure 4: KPIs by Enterprise Size

Performance Area Large Mid-market Small Number of FTE’s dedicated to A/P 41.9 7.5 4.7

Total number (#) of monthly invoices 30,668 9,944 658

Total value ($) of monthly invoices $24.7MM $7.5MM $769K

Number of payments made monthly 9,033 2,356 575

Number of unique suppliers paid in last 12 months

22,108 3,099 401

Average cost to process an invoice $21.36 $30.86 $14.08

Percent of Companies that outsource some part of A/P function

30% 13% 16%

Average cost savings threshold to pursue A/P outsourcing

22.1% 22.3% 16.3%




Chapter Four: Recommendations for Action

Key T

akea

ways

• Clearly define the scope and processes of the A/P function to improve the operational ef-fectiveness of the group while gaining better visibility into transactions, compliance, and process.

• A/P Managers must also work aggressively to ensure that A/P is fully integrated into the source-to-settle process.

• Invest in A/P Automation - the transactional savings alone can justify your investment. • Assess Outsource Opportunities – Best in Class enterprises employ outsourcing as a fun-

damental strategy to enhance current capabilities and affect a broader more rapid trans-formation.

ccounts payable is still viewed by many within the enterprise as the team respon-sible for invoice handling and payment processing while the higher-value activi-ties are often overlooked. A/P managers must actively work to promote a strate-

gic role for payables as part of the source-to-settle process.

Aberdeen recommends the following Success Strategies for the best results:

Laggard Steps to Success 1. Redefine your enterprise’s accounts payable process as the latter, but quite

integral, part of the source-to-settle process.

Move to align the A/P function with current procurement processes to build co-hesion within supply management and awareness across functions.

2. Benchmark the current state of your A/P operations.

While this certainly includes the performance metrics utilized in this report, en-terprises should also measure their level of A/P automation and propensity to de-ploy technology in this and complementary functions.

3. Identify outsource opportunities immediately – Dive in Headfirst!

In a fully paper-based environment, you could literally be years away from com-plete visibility into process and invoices. Considering the relatively low savings threshold for outsourcing that Best in Class companies have established, look for low risk, more tactical functions that can be readily outsourced like invoice re-ceipt and handling or payment scheduling.

A



Industry Average Steps to Success 1. Define the scope and approach for the A/P process.

By clearly and consistently defining the role of the A/P department within the source-to-settle, a more systematic approach may be applied to the invoice re-ceipt,

2. Automate A/P processes to close the Source-to-Settle loop.

Automation will drive process efficiencies, drive savings but understand that automation will not completely eliminate the flow of paper. Imaging, workflow, and e-invoicing are all areas to consider.

3. If you have not done so, convert the department structure to a shared ser-vices center.

Centralizing the function will drive a greater control over process standardization and best practice development. Additionally, the new center can provide greater accountability to and visibility for your internal customers

4. Continue to drive A/P resources from tactical to strategic activities.

Utilize a six sigma or other quality approach to understand the transaction lifecy-cle and prioritize the strategic value of each activity.

Best in Class Next Steps 1. Align with business and suppliers to develop a continuous improvement initia-

tive that focuses your resources on working smarter and more closely with the key internal and external stakeholders to better understand and thereby resolve errors, late payments, and disputes.

2. Review department for outsource opportunities.

Even within the best run A/P departments, there is opportunity for improvement. Focus on some of the more tactical areas like invoice scanning, document man-agement, and payment processing.

3. Utilize ROI and Cost of Capital calculations to determine optimal payment strategies.

Capabilities within certain EIPP and financial system applications can provide the financial analysis required to determine a payment strategy that provides the greatest benefit to the enterprise.

4. Automation with a focus on visibility. While Best in Class enterprises are more likely to have automated more of their A/P processes than their peers, a focus on visibility will help drive value. For ex-ample, strategic sourcing initiatives benefit by the inclusion of an invoice analy-sis. A review of supplier invoices can help identify complementary goods and services that may be sourced from the same supply base. This can improve lever-age in negotiations and drive savings across a greater number of categories





Author Profiles

Andrew Bartolini, Research Director Global Supply Management AberdeenGroup, Inc. Andrew Bartolini is a Supply Management professional with rich experience in strategic sourcing, business process transformation, and software implementation. As a leader at several solution providers, Bartolini managed the design and implementation of strategic sourcing and procurement processes for companies in the retail, manufacturing, energy, technology, transportation, defense, and finance sectors. He has also managed strategic sourcing projects exceeding $500 million in total value across a broad range of direct and indirect categories. His recent focus has been in identifying and leveraging world-class technologies to achieve operational excellence within the procurement function of For-tune 500 companies. His background also includes extensive transactional and analytical experience while working in management consulting and investment banking.

Vance Checketts, Channel Director Global Supply Management AberdeenGroup, Inc.

Vance Checketts is a recognized expert in the areas of procurement and supply manage-ment with a deep background in the application of technology and the underlying busi-ness process. Prior to Aberdeen he was at Oracle where he was responsible for the devel-opment and sales support of their procurement applications. Prior to Oracle, he held sen-ior roles managing direct and indirect procurement. He has lectured and published with various industry organizations, including IFPSM, ISM, and Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley. He holds an MBA from Brigham Young University. He oversees and con-tributes across the entire scope of Aberdeen’s Global Supply Management research team.



Appendix A: Research Methodology

etween November and December 2006, AberdeenGroup benchmarked the Ac-counts Payable strategies, experiences, and intentions of more than 150 enter-prises across multiple industries and geographies.

This benchmark report utilized Aberdeen’s fact-based research approach to provide a comprehensive framework for Procurement and Finance executives and other stake-holders to benchmark the effectiveness of their current A/P operations, quantify their im-pact, and identify actionable strategies for improvement. Responding supply management executives completed an online survey that included questions designed to determine the following:

• The maturity and scope of Accounts Payable Operations and how they fit within broader compliance and supply management initiatives

• The performance of different A/P department structures considering whether or not all or a portion of the function is outsourced.

• Those A/P processes that best lend themselves to outsourcing while quantifying the potential benefits that can be achieved in doing so.

• Emerging best practices to benchmark A/P performance in such areas as the cost to process payments, discount capture percentage, exception management, and Days Payables Outstanding (DPO)

Aberdeen supplemented this online survey effort with telephone interviews with select survey respondents, gathering additional information on A/P strategies, experiences, and results.

Responding enterprises included the following:

• Job function: The research sample included respondents with the following job functions: finance (45%), procurement and supply chain (26%), business process management (10%), and IT (9%).

• Job title: The research sample included respondents with the following job ti-tles: CEO or president or other C-level (18%), vice president (8%), director (22%), and manager (31%)

• Industry: The research sample included respondents from finance (20%) and high tech (11%) and then broadly distributed across 30 other industries.

• Geography: 71% of the research respondents were from North America, 15% were from Europe, Middle East & Africa and 13% were from Asia-Pacific.

• Company size: 42% of respondents were from large enterprises (annual revenues above US$1 billion); 32% were from midsize enterprises (annual revenues be-tween $50 million and $1 billion); and 26% of respondents were from small busi-nesses (annual revenues of $50 million or less).

B



Solution providers recognized as sponsors of this report were solicited after the fact and had no substantive influence on the research results. Their sponsorship has made it possi-ble for Aberdeen Group to make these findings available to readers at no charge.

Table 8: Competitive Framework

Competitive Framework Key

The Aberdeen Competitive Framework defines enterprises as falling into one of the three following levels of procurement practices and performance:

Laggards (30%) — Procurement practices that are significantly behind the average of the industry, and result in below average performance

Industry Average (50%) — Procurement practices that represent the average or norm, and result in aver-age industry performance.

Best in Class (20%) — Procurement practices that are the best currently being employed and significantly superior to the industry norm, and result in the top industry performance.

The CPO’s Strategic Agenda


Appendix B: Related Aberdeen Research & Tools

Related Aberdeen research that forms a companion or reference to this report includes:

• The Invoice Reconciliation & Payment Benchmark Report (June 2006)

• Source-to-Settle: Compliance Clues for the CFO (October 2006)

• CPO’s Strategic Agenda: Managing People Managing Spend (November 2006)

• CFO’s View of Procurement: Getting More to the Bottom Line (September 2005) Information on these and any other Aberdeen publications can be found at www.Aberdeen.com.

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/RA_IRP_JB_3185.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/BM_Compliance_Clues_3590.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/CPO_Agenda_RA_VC_AB_3610.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/RA_CFOView_JP_1972.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/

Aberdeen Group, Inc. 260 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110-3112 USA

Telephone: 617 723 7890 Fax: 617 723 7897 www.aberdeen.com

© 2006 Aberdeen Group, Inc. All rights reserved

Founded in 1988, Aberdeen Group is the technology- driven research destination of choice for the global business executive. Aberdeen Group has over 100,000 research members in over 36 countries around the world that both participate in and direct the most comprehen-sive technology-driven value chain research in the market. Through its continued fact-based research, benchmarking, and actionable analysis, Aberdeen Group offers global business and technology executives a unique mix of actionable research, KPIs, tools, and services.

The information contained in this publication has been obtained from sources Aberdeen believes to be reliable, but is not guaranteed by Aberdeen. Aberdeen publications reflect the analyst’s judgment at the time and are subject to change without notice. The trademarks and registered trademarks of the corporations mentioned in this publication are the property of their respective holders.

paperless ap automation

Documents