The Finance Category

Tradeshift By the Numbers (1H 2018) and a New Bank Offering (The “Early Payments Wallet”) [PRO]

In New York City yesterday, following the announcement of a $250 million funding round, Tradeshift provided an update to analysts, customers and partners. We covered a couple of the general updates already, including the announcement of a new receivables-centric application and supplier network offering (see: Tradeshift’s “Sellers Club” Targets Bottomline and Accounts Receivable Technology With a Many-to-Many Offering) and parallels Tradeshift is drawing from others in developing its own strategy (see: Tradeshift Analyst Day Dispatch: “Do You Want Amazon to Own Your Supplier Relationships?).

In today’s Spend Matters PRO coverage, we turn our attention to other announcements from the event, including a general corporate update (i.e., Tradeshift by the numbers) and other product announcements. The emphasis is on Tradeshift’s new bank-centric offerings that support early payment programs, including bank and multi-bank funding options, along with KYC (Know Your Customer) and the other alphabet soup requirements that banks require from a supplier/customer onboarding standpoint. We’ll also share our observations coming out of the event. Let’s begin.

Bringing Procurement Rigor to Merger Integration

Spend Matters welcomes this guest post from Bernard Gunther, co-founder of Spendata.

Mergers are rationalized by the expectation of post-merger synergies, a major one being cost reduction. However, cost savings opportunities that are routinely exploited by procurement are rarely a focal point for “clean teams” in pre-merger scenarios, or by the merged organization in the key 100 days of post-merger integration (PMI). In fact, the majority of mergers rarely deliver all of the expected cost savings.[2] In contrast, procurement can play a crucial role in planning for and delivering cost savings typically overlooked during the pre-merger analysis.

Coupa vs. SAP Ariba: E-Invoicing and Supplier Network Evaluation and Head-to-Head Comparison

Coupa and SAP Ariba are among the two strongest invoice-to-pay providers in the Spend Matters Q1 2018 Invoice-to-Pay SolutionMap on a functional scoring basis. But how do they stack up against each other in a head-to-head bout, especially when considering core e-invoicing and supplier network capabilities as part of the invoice-to-pay solution area?

Join us in this unfiltered SolutionMap results analysis from our Q1 2018 dataset, supplemented by commentary from Spend Matters Founder Jason Busch. These recurring Head-to-Head columns share insights from each quarterly SolutionMap report for SolutionMap Insider Subscribers, providing unique comparative cuts of SolutionMap benchmark data, along with the trademark quips that have defined Spend Matters analysis since its inception.

So prepare for some real data and expect at least a modicum of salty opinion as we pit Coupa vs. SAP Ariba against each other. Not yet an Insider member? Here’s a preview: in certain invoice-to-pay categories – which include supplier network, configurability, technology (overall), general services, invoicing setup, invoicing creation/capturing/submission, services invoicing & contract invoicing, invoicing collaboration, invoice validations/approvals, invoice integrations, invoicing compliance, invoice mobility, invoicing analytics, payment/financing and overall invoice-to-pay scoring — SAP Ariba sneaks in a knock-out blow.

But in others, Coupa jabs and beats its foe into the corner, delivering punch after punch until the round ends (and even tosses in a few jabs after the bell). Overall, the results suggest that it is essential to evaluate each provider’s capability in the context of specific deployment considerations (e.g., global compliance, supplier network consideration, services invoicing, invoicing analytics).

The Q1 2018 Invoice-to-Pay SolutionMap benchmark is now based on an underlying dataset featuring 13 separate providers, including nearly all of the must-shortlist invoice-to-pay technology providers procurement organizations can expect to consider in a typical selection process (as well as those they should consider but might overlook). Whether you’re in the market for a new invoice-to-pay product or just want to know if you made the right decision for your organization, our SolutionMap analysis and benchmark data can tell you the answer. Curious to learn more? Don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Corcentric Acquires Source One: Transaction Analysis (Part 1) — Background, Rationale and Deal Analysis [PRO]

Corcentric, a unique amalgam of accounts payable automation, order-to-cash, trade financing and group purchasing organization (GPO) software and services, announced earlier in May it would acquire Source One, a boutique sourcing and procurement consultancy. Terms of the transaction were not announced, but Spend Matters believes they are in line with the increasingly higher revenue and EBITDA multiples procurement consultancies and services firms have afforded themselves as of late.

For those unfamiliar with the closely held Corcentric, the name is the permanent rebrand of Corcentric and AmeriQuest. Both companies are based in the Philadelphia metropolitan area, arguably a critical factor for Corcentric to realize the full synergies from this targeted acquisition, especially given the relatively small size of Source One.

This two-part Spend Matters PRO research brief provides insight into the transaction. Part 1 provides an overview of the acquisition and background on Source One. Part 2 will provide an analysis of the transaction and our opinion on what it means for the broader procurement consulting and solutions market.

Will Real-Time Payments Replace Cards? Majority of Merchants Worldwide Think So

early pay

Merchants around the world are warming up to real-time payment, with 77% expecting that it will eventually replace payment cards, according to a recent survey conducted by Ovum and ACI Worldwide. Survey respondents based in the Netherlands, Argentina and Belgium are particularly sanguine on the adoption of real-time payment. A real-time payment system, as the name suggests, lets one use a smartphone, digital wallet or other channel to conduct interbank electronic transfers instantaneously so that the received funds would be immediately accessible

To Digitize T&E and Invoice Management, Companies Must Improve IT-Finance Alignment

Oversight Systems

The digitalization of manual processes is viewed as increasingly vital across functions, and travel and expense (T&E) management is no exception. According to a Forrester report commissioned by SAP Concur, the majority of companies face challenges linked to manual processes, from errors in expense reports to the time-consuming nature of dealing with paper documents. Surveying 378 IT and finance professionals involved with T&E and invoice management at their companies, Forrester found that only 13% are very satisfied with the T&E and invoice management processes that their companies are using.

Best Practice Tips For Implementing Dynamic Discounting and Other Trade Financing Programs [Plus+]

In this Spend Matters Plus analysis, we investigate some of the key best practice tips for dynamic discounting implementation and trade financing programs. In a follow-up post, we will also share “worst practices” that far too many procurement and AP organizations are pursuing with dynamic discounting and trade financing programs because they don’t know better.

Basware vs. SAP Ariba: E-Invoicing and Supplier Network Evaluation and Head-to-Head Comparison

Basware and SAP Ariba are among the two strongest invoice-to-pay providers in the Spend Matters Q1 2018 Invoice-to-Pay (I2P) SolutionMap on a functional basis. But how do they stack up against each other in a head-to-head bout, especially when considering core e-invoicing and supplier network capabilities as part of the invoice-to-pay solution area?

Join us in this unfiltered head-to-head SolutionMap results analysis from our Q1 2018 dataset, along with commentary from Spend Matters Founder Jason Busch. These recurring Head-to-Head columns share insights from each quarterly SolutionMap report for SolutionMap Insider subscribers, providing unique comparative cuts of SolutionMap benchmark data, along with the trademark quips that have defined Spend Matters analysis since its inception. The most recent head-to-head comparisons include Coupa vs. SAP Ariba (e-procurement) and Coupa vs. Jaggaer Advantage (sourcing).

So prepare for some real data and expect a few sparks to fly as we pit Basware and SAP Ariba head-to-head in the Spend Matters evaluation ring. Not a SolutionMap Insider member yet? Here’s a preview: In certain invoice-to-pay categories — which span supplier network, configurability, technology (overall), general services, invoicing setup, invoicing creation/capturing/submission, services invoicing and contract invoicing, invoicing collaboration, invoice validations/approvals, invoice integrations, invoicing compliance, invoice mobility, invoicing analytics, payment/financing and overall invoice-to-pay scoring — SAP Ariba takes the yellow jersey. But in others, Basware is first in the peloton. And overall the results suggest that it is essential to evaluate each provider’s capabilities in the context of specific deployment considerations (e.g., AP automation-led initiatives compared with broader procure-to-pay considerations).

The Q1 2018 Invoice-to-Pay SolutionMap benchmark is now based on an underlying dataset featuring 13 separate providers, including nearly all of the must-shortlist invoice-to-pay technology providers procurement organizations can expect to consider in a typical selection process (as well as those they should consider but might overlook). Whether you’re in the market for a new invoice-to-pay product or just want to know if you made the right decision for your organization, our SolutionMap analysis and benchmark data can tell you the answer. Curious to learn more? Don’t hesitate to get in touch.

From Watch to Know in 2018: How OpusCapita Helps Companies Tackle Complexity on the Buy and Sell Sides

Each year, some companies on the Spend Matters 50 Providers to Know and 50 Providers to Watch lists push themselves beyond simply a standout performance. They earn the recognition that they are not only bringing innovation into procurement organizations but also leading the charge to change the way we do business for the better. These are the providers who shifted from Watch to Know in 2018.

To learn more about these providers, we reached out to the four such cases in our 2018 50/50 lists, asking how they’ve changed over the years and what differentiates them from the competition. Today’s Q&A features Adam Tamburello, product marketing manager at OpusCapita, a provider of source-to-pay (S2P) solutions.

From Watch to Know in 2018: How RapidRatings is Helping Procurement Filter the Risk Signals from the Noise

Each year, some companies on the Spend Matters 50 Providers to Know and 50 Providers to Watch lists push themselves beyond simply a standout performance. They earn the recognition that they are not only bringing innovation into procurement organizations but also leading the charge to change the way we do business for the better. These are the providers who shifted from Watch to Know in 2018.

To learn more about these providers, we reached out to the four such cases in our 2018 50/50 lists, asking how they’ve changed over the years and what differentiates them from the competition. Today’s Q&A features Jim Gellert, chairman and CEO of RapidRatings, a supplier risk management solution that specializes in financial risk management.

Sponsored Article

How Mid-Market Companies Can Benefit from Innovative AP Automation Solutions

Not all organizations are created equal. Far from it, in fact. Many mid-sized companies feel like they are getting overshadowed by large multinational enterprises when it comes to having access to purchasing solutions that meet their unique procure-to-pay (P2P) needs. We think that in 2018 that is about to change. 

Sponsored Article

3 Reasons Why Payables Transformation is Coming to Mid-Market Businesses

Catalant

Despite their outward appearances, large and midsize companies face many similar payables challenges. The real difference between the two, however, comes from the way different companies address these challenges. Whereas a large multinational likely has the necessary resources or a shared services organization to manage purchasing and payables complexity, mid-market firms are left to tackle the same problems with fewer people, less budget and older tools. Add to this increasing regulatory hurdles, global expansion and the ever-present need for faster revenue growth and one thing becomes clear: midsize companies need a payables transformation to thrive in the modern economy.