The seven sins of cash positioning: Challenges in modern treasury
This article is written by Nomentia From the outside, it looks like control. Dashboards. Reports. Daily check-ins. But talk to anyone in treasury, and the truth comes out fast: it’s not control. It’s the illusion of it.Behind the numbers is a daily scramble. Outdated data. The tools don’t talk to each other. Manual work dressed up as a process. And the real cash position? Always a little fuzzy, always a little too late. Treasury teams aren’t confused. They’re constrained. They’re being boxed in by tools and thinking that no longer fit the job. And as long as that illusion holds, every decision made carries more risk than anyone wants to admit. The experts Sarah Häger Sarah Häger is Chief Commercial Officer at Enable Banking and a leading voice in Open Banking. With over 15 years in corporate banking (including six years heading Nordea’s Open Banking Community team), she has deep expertise in financial data infrastructure and API development. At Enable Banking, she helps businesses gain better access to their financial data, a critical factor in improving cash visibility and control. Named one of Sweden’s top 75 future female leaders in 2019, Sarah is passionate about using regulation and technology to drive smarter financial decision-making. Jouni Kirjola Jouni Kirjola is the Head of Solutions and Pre-Sales at Nomentia with over 20 years of experience in corporate cash management and has deep expertise in cash forecasting, payment factories, in-house banking, and process development. The seven sins of cash positioning Treasury teams are told to manage risk better, improve forecasting accuracy, and ensure liquidity. But the system is rigged against them. Take Olivia. She’s the Group Treasurer at a multinational with operations in 22 countries and over 150 bank accounts. On paper, she’s responsible for ensuring liquidity and optimizing working capital. In practice, she spends most of her day fighting systems that weren’t built for the job. She knows where the money should be. But knowing where it actually is? That’s a different story. Her frustration isn’t unique. It’s structural. And it shows up in seven distinct — and persistent — ways. 1. Cash moves fast. Financial data does not Payments are instant now. Customers pay in real time. Suppliers expect the same. But the treasurer’s view of the company’s cash lags by hours, sometimes days. Her reports depend on batch processes, delayed bank feeds, and manual updates. By the time the numbers hit her screen, they’re already stale. She’s expected to act in real-time with data that simply isn’t. “Many treasurers today are still making decisions based on yesterday’s data in a world that moves in real time. This isn’t a technology gap anymore. It’s an adoption problem.” –Sarah Häger, Chief Commercial Officer, Enable Banking 2. Too many banks. Too little integration Her company has grown fast — through acquisitions, expansions, and regional deals. The result? A sprawl of banking relationships, each with its own portal, file format, and time zone. The treasury team jumps between systems just to check balances. There’s no consolidated view, no standard feed, and no way to get everyone looking at the same version of cash at the same time. “Every additional bank adds complexity, not just in reconciliation, but in contract management, compliance, access control, and real-time visibility. Without harmonized integration, it’s death by a thousand portals.” –Jouni Kirjola, Head of Solutions and Pre-Sales, Nomentia 3. Tools that weren’t built for real-time cash visibility The enterprise software stack was built for finance. Not treasury. ERPs are good at historicals, not live positioning. Olivia’s ERP can close the books, but it can’t tell her if she can move $5M today. APIs could help, but getting them to work across fragmented systems is expensive, time-consuming, and politically difficult. The treasurer’s toolkit is full of software but light on visibility. “ERPs weren’t built for liquidity decision-making. Treasury needs tools designed for now, not the month-end.”— Sarah Häger 4. Manual labor, modern stakes The mornings start in spreadsheets. Every. Single. Day. The process hasn’t changed in years: log into five bank portals, export yesterday’s balances, copy them into Excel, and manually roll it up into a position report. It’s slow, error-abundant, and draining. And yet, this is still the most reliable method the treasury team has. One wrong cell and the whole forecast is off, but she’s still expected to hit accuracy targets. “When spreadsheets are your source of truth, you’re not managing liquidity. You’re gambling with it.” –Jouni Kirjola 5. There is no single source of truth for cash Sometimes, Olivia’s numbers say one thing, the controller’s dashboard another, and the CFO sees something else entirely. Why? Because cash is scattered across entities, systems, and regions. There’s no single source of truth, just partial pictures, gut feeling, and, worst of all, old reports. And the treasurer has to live with the consequences. 6. Cross-border cash chaos The further the money goes, the less visibility she has. Asia-Pacific reports late. Latin America comes with conversion surprises. Europe follows its own rules. Every geography adds complexity. From time zones to regulatory delays to currency risks. The treasurer is supposed to optimize global liquidity. But the system is so fragmented that she can’t even be sure how much is truly available, let alone where and when. 7. Lack of automation and API adoption APIs are everywhere — except where she needs them. The banks talk a good game about real-time APIs. Providers like Enable Banking, for example, make those APIs accessible across Europe, even for companies with complex infrastructure. But Olivia’s internal setup is weighed down by competing priorities, siloed teams, and long IT queues. The potential is there, but turning it into a working reality still feels like pushing water uphill. “APIs shouldn’t be thought of as a tech upgrade. They’re an operating model shift. Real-time data flow is the foundation for modern treasury.”— Jouni Kirjola Judgment day: Decision without vision Olivia knows the risks aren’t just operational. They’re existential. Because when cash visibility is broken, decision-making happens in the…
Franklin
Inside Treasury’s Debt Dilemma—and How to Tackle It With Confidence
This article is written by Palm Treasury teams don’t just manage cash. They manage complexity — and few things are more complex, and operationally demanding, than debt management. What starts as a practical financing approach — taking on a few loans to fund growth or stabilize liquidity — often turns into a sprawling network of financial obligations. It’s not unusual for treasury teams to manage dozens of loans across institutions, each with their own terms, rates, and covenants. When treasury teams manage dozens of loans across different maturities and interest rates, they often face fragmented debt management, operational overload, and scattered data across disconnected systems — risking missed payments, covenant breaches, and the consequences of loan defaults, credit rating drops, or public market fallout. This isn’t just a data issue. It’s an operational strain with strategic consequences. The Compounding Complexity of Debt Debt operations often evolve faster than the systems built to manage them. A few tactical loans can quickly spiral into a time-intensive burden. Tracking obligations is just the start; managing their growing ripple effects across the business is where complexity compounds. Each loan brings its own terms, rates, maturities, and covenants. A small oversight can have big consequences. And even when each loan is manageable alone, together they create a workload that demands constant vigilance. Add in shifting market conditions, stricter lender terms, and rising expectations from internal stakeholders, and debt turns from a supporting tool into a defining factor in how treasury teams perform. One loan? A spreadsheet works. Ten loans? You’re checking calendars. Fifty loans? You’re at risk of missing something important — not because the team isn’t skilled, but because the system wasn’t built for it. As loan volume grows, treasury teams face: This leads to a constant juggling of inputs and subsequent outputs. And in practice, even highly competent teams find themselves spending more time managing process than optimizing outcomes. What Treasury Teams Want to Avoid The stress of managing debt manually doesn’t just wear on time and resources — it wears on confidence. If repayments are missed or covenants are breached, the consequences escalate quickly. Lenders lose trust. Credit ratings are impacted. Risk od defaults. Internal stakeholders question reporting accuracy. And in today’s environment — where interest rates move faster, lender terms are stricter, and treasury teams are leaner — there’s little room for error. This operational overload creates serious risk that can waterfall: These aren’t edge cases. They’re common enough to make treasurers feel like they’re operating one step behind — all while CFOs demand sharper insights and faster reporting. Treasury’s credibility hinges on its ability to see what’s ahead and act early. Without the right infrastructure, that visibility collapses. What Better Looks Like A better approach doesn’t mean overhauling everything — it means integrating debt where it matters most. By folding debt directly into liquidity planning and reporting workflows, treasury teams unlock a smarter, more scalable strategy: With debt positioned as a core driver in your planning — not a side ledger — treasurers can make better decisions, sooner. They’re routine decisions — powered by accurate, integrated data. A more scalable, structured approach isn’t a luxury — it’s a necessity. When debt becomes part of the forecasting layer, treasury regains control. Instead of operating in the rearview mirror, teams can anticipate, model, and respond. The good news? There’s a clear fix — and it starts by bringing debt into the forecasting layer. That means: When debt lives inside your forecasting system — not adjacent to it — treasury teams unlock clarity. They can prioritize, consolidate, and renegotiate with confidence. Conclusion Debt is a powerful lever — but only if it’s managed with foresight. The best way to mitigate risk and regain control is by incorporating repayment schedules directly into your cash forecast and positioning cash accordingly. Smart positioning enables treasury teams to make deliberate, proactive moves: consolidating smaller loans, timing drawdowns with confidence, and renegotiating terms from a place of clarity. Just as importantly, covenants shouldn’t live in offline trackers. They need daily visibility. A central dashboard ensures nothing slips, so treasury leaders can focus on value — not risk response. This shift — from reactive to proactive debt management — is what separates teams that are firefighting from those shaping the future of treasury. The teams that adopt it now will be the ones setting the standard tomorrow. And that transformation begins with understanding where your process stands today. Also Read Join our Treasury Community Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in treasury management or those interested in learning more about various topics related to treasury management, including cash management, foreign exchange management, and payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below. Notice: JavaScript is required for this content.