Faster payments and reconciliation are separate operating problems. Faster settlement does not automatically improve payment reconciliation.

The payment went through in seconds. The books were still wrong three days later.

Money can move quickly while invoice data, approval history, remittance details and accounting records remain scattered across different systems. Faster settlement does not automatically create a faster finance operation. It can move the bottleneck downstream, from the payment desk to the reconciliation queue.

I think about this in terms of two clocks. The payment clock measures how quickly money moves. The close clock measures how quickly the business can explain and reconcile that movement.

A company has not meaningfully improved its payment operation if it shortens the payment clock while making the close clock harder to manage.

A payment has two journeys: the movement of funds and the movement of information through approval, accounting and reconciliation.

The Federal Reserve distinguishes clearing from settlement. Clearing involves payment information and related activities. Settlement is the debiting and crediting of accounts. They are connected, but they are not the same step.

That difference became clear to me while running Tyler Petroleum. We were using different payment providers for different vendors, which created cost and time burdens. The problem was not just how long money took to move. Every additional system created another place where payment information had to be tracked, matched and understood.

The question is not simply, “How quickly can we send this?” It is, “What will finance need to know after we send it?”

Source link