Joel Campbell is the Chief Financial Officer at TreviPay, a fully managed B2B payments platform for global brands.
getty
CFOs rarely debate whether their companies should build an ERP from scratch. Finance defines the controls, reporting requirements and policies the system needs to support, then relies on technology built and maintained by specialists. Order-to-cash processes remain an exception. Many companies still separately manage credit, invoicing, payment acceptance, collections and reconciliation across internal teams, customized systems and point solutions.
The cost of that model is easy to underestimate. New markets, sales channels, payment methods and buyer requirements add integrations, workflows and exceptions finance and technology teams must maintain. CFOs are already weighing those demands against limited resources. Gartner reported 75% of CFOs plan to increase technology budgets in 2026, while expected finance headcount growth has fallen from 6% in 2025 to 2% in 2026. Order-to-cash belongs in the same resource allocation discussion. CFOs should evaluate whether operating a capability internally creates enough value to justify the technology investment and capacity it consumes.
Deciding What Finance Needs To Own
Companies routinely use third-party ERP and HR systems while retaining authority over the policies and decisions those systems execute. Finance can apply the same operating principle to order-to-cash systems.
As order-to-cash becomes more complex, CFOs need to determine where keeping a capability in-house improves decision-making or competitive position. Maintaining every integration, invoice format and reconciliation workflow rarely requires the same company-specific judgment as setting credit policy or determining working capital objectives.
Credit strategy, risk appetite, working capital objectives, customer policies and governance require company-specific judgment. Finance should retain control of those decisions, including how payment terms are structured. The underlying infrastructure can support repeatable operational work.
Calculating The Cost After Go-Live
Build-versus-buy comparisons can become distorted when a provider’s ongoing fees are compared with the initial cost of internal development. As the business expands into new geographies, channels or buyer segments, those systems must accommodate additional integrations, workflows and exceptions, all of which must be maintained and require additional investment after launch.
When systems don’t connect cleanly, finance employees often fill the gaps by reconciling data, correcting invoices and resolving payment discrepancies. As transaction volume and complexity increases, manual work can consume capacity that could otherwise go toward analyzing risk, improving cash forecasts and supporting business decisions.
A credible build-versus-buy analysis should account for the full cost of operating the capability over time, including technology maintenance, integration work and finance capacity. Each new integration creates upkeep and each exception creates manual work. Some of those costs sit outside the original technology budget. The time spent fixing either is capacity finance and technology teams forfeit.
Testing Internal Ownership Against Competitive Value
Finance leaders should apply the same scrutiny to order-to-cash infrastructure.
Pricing strategy, customer relationships, credit policy and capital allocation can distinguish one company from another. Maintaining a customer-specific invoice format or building another reconciliation workflow is less likely to create an advantage buyers recognize.
Research (registration required) by my company found 83% of B2B buyers say a consistent purchasing experience is extremely or very important when choosing a supplier. Buyers care about a purchasing and payment experience that works reliably and feels more like a familiar consumer experience. The infrastructure should be evaluated on whether it delivers a reliable purchasing experience at scale.
CFOs can pressure-test the decision by looking at where internal control improves the customer experience or competitive position, then weighing that value against the full cost and risk of operating the capability. They also need to consider how the model will hold up as transaction volume, channels and geographic reach increase.
Some businesses will have sound reasons to build or maintain specific components of order-to-cash. Applying the same investment discipline used for other enterprise technology helps identify which capabilities warrant internal resources.
Evaluating The Full Order-To-Cash System
Credit, invoicing, payments, collections and cash application operate as a connected system. Automating invoice delivery has limited value if reconciliation still requires significant manual work. Improving payment acceptance solves only part of the problem if disconnected data continues to slow collections. Evaluating the full order-to-cash process helps finance see where automation removes work and where it simply shifts the burden to another team or process.
A connected operating model can reduce manual handoffs and give finance clearer visibility into receivables, cash flow and risk. A connected operating model automates more of the repeatable execution across receivables, while finance retains authority over credit strategy, risk, working capital objectives and customer policies. The result is an operating model designed to support greater transaction volume and more complex customer requirements without requiring operational resources to increase at the same rate.
CFOs already apply this discipline when evaluating enterprise systems. Order-to-cash should face the same standard. Finance can retain control over credit policy, risk, payment terms and working capital objectives without building and maintaining every system and workflow that executes those decisions. Company-specific judgment stays with finance, while the infrastructure supporting those decisions can be evaluated on its ability to scale, operate efficiently and support the business as it grows.
The information provided here is not investment, tax or financial advice. You should consult with a licensed professional for advice concerning your specific situation.
Forbes Finance Council is an invitation-only organization for executives in successful accounting, financial planning and wealth management firms. Do I qualify?
