UnlockIng Liquidity: Why WorkIng Capital is a Team Sport

From Treasury Masterminds

Based on a Treasury Masterminds webinar featuring Bojan BelejkovskI, Board Member at Treasury Masterminds, and Charles Brough, VP Global Head of Account Management at SAP Taulia. Moderated by Patrick Kunz.

Recordings on Spotify and YouTube:

Unlocking Liquidity: Why Working Capital Is Everyone’s Problem

Working capital is one of those topics that every company talks about, but few companies truly own.

It sounds simple enough. Improve receivables. Optimise payables. Reduce trapped cash. Create more visibility. Free up liquidity.

In practice, it is rarely that clean.

Working capital does not sit neatly inside one department. Treasury sees the cash impact, procurement negotiates supplier terms, sales agrees customer terms, finance manages the accounting, operations influences execution. Everyone touches it, yet ownership is often unclear.

That was one of the key themes in our Treasury Masterminds webinar, “Unlocking Liquidity: Flexible Working Capital Strategies”, with Bojan Belejkovski, Treasury Masterminds board member, and Charles Smith from SAP Taulia.

As Patrick said during the session:

“There is no working capital department and there will never be a working capital department. Collaboration is the key.”

That may sound obvious, but it is often exactly where working capital initiatives fail.

Treasury Sees The Impact

Treasury is usually close to the numbers. It sees the cash flow forecast, the bank balances, the liquidity gaps, the funding needs and the impact of payment behaviour.

Bojan described treasury’s role very clearly:

“Treasury owns the measurement and the consequence of working capital, even when it doesn’t own the levers themselves.”

That is the uncomfortable truth.

Treasury can see that DSO is moving in the wrong direction. It can see when supplier terms create liquidity pressure. It can see when cash is trapped in entities or countries. It can also see when the forecast does not match reality.

But treasury does not always control the decisions that create the problem.

Sales may agree to extended payment terms to close a deal. Procurement may negotiate supplier terms without considering the full cash impact. Business units may sit on cash locally. By the time treasury is involved, the decision has often already been made.

Bojan put it even sharper:

“Treasury is often the last function to find out and the first one to be asked to fix something.”

Many treasurers will recognise that sentence immediately.

Visibility Comes First

Before companies can improve working capital, they need to understand where liquidity is stuck.

Charles made that point early in the discussion:

“If you don’t have visibility, you can’t actually take any action, and you can’t improve from where you are today.”

This is where many organisations still struggle.

They may have data in ERP systems, TMS platforms, spreadsheets, bank portals and local reports. The information exists, but it is fragmented. By the time it is collected, cleaned and discussed, the opportunity may already have moved.

That lack of visibility makes it difficult to answer basic questions.

  • Which customers are paying late?
  • Which suppliers are being paid too early?
  • Where is cash trapped?
  • Which payment terms are inconsistent?
  • Where is the biggest liquidity opportunity?

Without answers to those questions, working capital management becomes guesswork. And guesswork is not a strategy, even if someone puts it in PowerPoint.

Receivables Are Often Under-Owned

One of the most interesting parts of the webinar was the discussion about receivables.

When asked where he would focus first, Bojan did not hesitate.

“If I can fix one tomorrow, it’s going to be receivables.”

His reason was simple. Receivables are often under-owned.

Sales is focused on revenue. Credit is focused on risk. Finance is focused on accounting. Treasury is focused on cash. All of them have a role, but that does not automatically create ownership.

Or as Bojan said:

“Everyone touches receivables. No one owns it.”

That is a big issue.

A company can have a strong sales performance and still struggle with cash collection. It can have good revenue growth while liquidity gets stuck in overdue invoices. It can have a strong pipeline, while treasury is forced to deal with the cash gap.

Receivables are also messy. Customer behaviour changes. Billing data is not always clean. Collection processes are not always consistent. Commercial teams do not always want to have uncomfortable conversations with customers.

That is why receivables deserve more attention from treasury.

Not because treasury should suddenly become the collections department, nobody needs that tragedy, but because treasury can help quantify the cash impact, highlight the risk and bring the right teams together.

Supply Chain Finance Is Not Free Money

Supply chain finance was another important topic in the discussion.

It is sometimes presented as a simple liquidity tool. Extend payment terms, offer suppliers early payment, unlock cash. Done.

Reality is more nuanced.

Charles explained it well:

“The primary value of supply chain finance is as a negotiation tool.”

That is an important distinction.

A good supply chain finance programme is not just about creating liquidity for the buyer. It can also support suppliers by giving them access to financing at better rates than they could achieve on their own.

For the buyer, it creates flexibility. For the supplier, it can reduce cash flow pressure. For procurement, it becomes part of the broader supplier relationship.

That also means success depends on adoption.

Charles made another practical point:

“It’s not just about the rate. The supplier experience matters just as much.”

If the programme is difficult to use, suppliers will not adopt it. If procurement is not involved, it will not scale. If treasury builds the programme in isolation, it risks becoming a nice technical solution that nobody actually uses.

Bojan was clear on this as well:

“The programs that scale are the ones where procurement and treasury are genuinely aligned on day one.”

That is probably one of the most practical lessons for any company considering supply chain finance.

Do not start with the technology.

Start with alignment.

Treasury Needs to Be in the Room Earlier

Working capital cannot be managed properly if treasury only joins at the end of the process.

Bojan captured this perfectly:

“You can’t drive strategy from the end of the process.”

If customer terms are agreed without treasury input, the cash impact becomes treasury’s problem later. If supplier terms are negotiated without considering liquidity, treasury has to manage the consequences. If local entities hold excess cash without group visibility, treasury has to work around the structure.

The companies that do this better involve treasury earlier.

Bojan explained:

“The companies where treasury drives working capital have given treasury a seat early and with a mandate.”

That mandate matters.

Treasury should not be there just to report the outcome. It should help the business understand the cash effect of decisions before those decisions are made. This does not mean treasury needs to own sales, procurement or operations. It does mean treasury should be part of the conversation when payment terms, financing structures and liquidity trade-offs are discussed.

Automation Before AI

Naturally, AI came up during the webinar. It always does now. Mention treasury technology in 2026 and AI enters the room like it owns the building.

But the discussion was refreshingly practical.

AI is not the first step.

As Patrick said during the session:

“AI is not step one. It’s often step three or four.”

Before AI can add real value, companies need visibility, automation and clean data. If the underlying data is poor, the output will be poor as well. AI does not magically fix broken processes. It just makes bad data look more confident.

Charles described the role of technology around three themes: visibility, scalability and automation.

Automation removes manual work. It makes receivables finance more scalable. It supports reconciliation. It helps treasury teams manage more with fewer resources.

Only after that foundation is in place does AI become truly useful.

Charles summarised the right mindset clearly:

“People direct. AI executes.”

That is the point.

AI should help treasury professionals gather information faster, analyse patterns and support better decisions. It should not replace judgment.

For small treasury teams, this can be powerful. Less time spent collecting data. More time spent using it.

Real Value or Balance Sheet Cosmetics?

Towards the end of the webinar, we discussed a more provocative question.

Are working capital programmes real liquidity improvements, or are they sometimes just balance sheet cosmetics?

The honest answer is: both can happen.

Some programmes are used around reporting dates to improve metrics temporarily. That may look good on paper, but it does not necessarily improve the underlying business.

Bojan was clear about that risk:

“Cosmetics are real, but they shouldn’t be the reason why you did the program.”

A well-run working capital programme should create repeatable value. It should improve liquidity, reduce funding pressure, strengthen supplier or customer relationships and give the company more flexibility.

Charles brought the discussion back to one key metric: the internal cost of cash.

If a company understands its true cost of cash, it can make better decisions about early payment discounts, supplier financing, receivables finance and liquidity trade-offs.

That is when working capital moves from cosmetic reporting to real value creation.

Final Thought

Working capital is not just a treasury topic: It is a business topic.

Treasury may see the problem first, but it cannot solve it alone. The real value comes when treasury, procurement, sales, finance and operations work from the same playbook.

That requires visibility.

It requires shared ownership.

It requires technology that supports the process.

And most importantly, it requires treasury to be involved before the problem lands in the cash forecast.

Working capital is often described as hidden liquidity. That is true. But in many companies, the liquidity is not just hidden in receivables, payables or trapped cash.

It is hidden between departments.

Also Read

Join our Treasury Community

Treasury Mastermind 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 to get more information.

0
0

Leave a Reply