Requisition to payment, run as one process

Source-to-pay adds everything upstream: category strategy, market research, running a tender, negotiating and signing the contract. Procure-to-pay starts once those decisions are made and covers the transactional execution against them. P2P is the part that repeats thousands of times a year, which is what makes it worth outsourcing.

Handing the operational cycle to an outside team that runs it in your systems: requisition intake and approval chasing, purchase order creation and acknowledgement, receipting and three-way match, exception handling, payment file preparation and cycle reporting. The provider runs the process. You keep supplier selection, approval and payment authority.

Outsource the whole cycle when your problem is the handoffs, which is the usual case: requisitions waiting, orders unacknowledged, receipts missing and invoices that cannot match as a result. Outsource one step when that step alone is genuinely the bottleneck. If it is only accounts payable, our invoice processing service is the cheaper answer and we will point you at it.

A platform gives you workflow, catalogues and matching rules. It does not ring an approver who is on leave, ring a supplier for an order acknowledgement, work out who forgot to post a goods receipt, or decide whether a price difference is acceptable. Software makes the clean transactions fast. People make the messy ones finish. Most teams end up needing both, which is what we run.

Checking the invoice against the purchase order and the goods receipt before it is approved for payment, so you are paying for what you ordered, at the price you agreed, and only for what actually arrived. It only works if the earlier steps were done properly, which is exactly why matching problems are usually symptoms of something upstream.

The share of transactions that get from request to payment without a person having to intervene. It is the single most useful measure of how healthy a procure-to-pay cycle is, because it tells you how much of your team's week is spent on exceptions rather than on the work itself. We measure it in the free audit and report it monthly after that.

End to end, from the date a requisition is raised to the date the invoice is cleared for payment, with the time at each handoff shown separately. Measuring only requisition-to-PO or only invoice-to-payment tends to make each step look reasonable while the whole cycle stays slow, which is how the problem hides.

Two models: a price per transaction, or a monthly fee for dedicated analysts. We quote after the free audit, because the honest number depends on your volumes at each step, how many entities and systems are involved and how many transactions need exception work. Anyone quoting a rate before seeing that is guessing.

We tell you up front rather than at renewal. Setup, process mapping and SOP writing sit inside the fixed fee pilot. Ongoing fees cover the agreed scope and volume band. Anything outside it, such as a new entity, a new ERP, a catalogue rebuild or a large one off backlog, is quoted separately before work starts.

SAP, Oracle, NetSuite, Microsoft Dynamics, Coupa, Ariba, Sage, Xero, QuickBooks, Zoho and Tally. We work inside your systems rather than asking your team to learn ours, so there is no migration and no new licence to buy.

No. We prepare, route and chase. You approve, you award and you release. Nobody on our side can authorise spend, select a supplier or move money. Your delegation of authority stays exactly as it is, and the pilot documents it rather than changing it.

One named analyst owns an exception from the moment it is raised until it closes, regardless of which step it started in. A price mismatch that traces back to an unapproved order change does not get bounced between three queues; the person holding it goes and fixes the order. That single change is most of the difference an end-to-end team makes.

Six to eight weeks from first conversation to one team running the cycle. Roughly two weeks for the audit, then a fixed fee pilot on one entity or category, then steady state. Your side of it is a month of documents, one named owner across procurement and finance, scoped system access and your approval rules.

Access is scoped by you, granted to named people, and revoked through your own leaver process. We contract on standard clauses, name every sub-processor, and work to GDPR, UK GDPR, PIPEDA, the Australian Privacy Principles and Saudi PDPL. Duties are separated, so the analyst who maintains supplier data is never the analyst who processes that supplier's invoices. ISO 27001 alignment is in progress and SOC 2 Type II is on the roadmap. We state that status honestly rather than showing badges we do not hold.

The intent is to redeploy them onto supplier management, contract compliance, controls and analysis, which is the work transactional chasing crowds out. We will tell you honestly what your volume supports rather than promising a headcount reduction to win the work.

Yes, and it is the sensible way in. Pick the entity where the cycle hurts most, take the fixed fee pilot, and judge us on whether requisition-to-pay time and touchless rate moved against the baseline.

You keep the end to end SOPs and process maps we write, because they are yours throughout, and your data never leaves your systems. Transition out support is written into the contract from day one rather than negotiated at the point you want to leave.

They are the three component steps of this cycle, and each is sold on its own if that is all you need: purchase requisition processing covers intake and approval routing, purchase order management covers ordering and acknowledgement, and invoice processing covers matching through payment preparation. This page is for buying all three as one process with one owner and one SLA.