Automation

Post go-live optimisation that turns your e-invoicing pipeline into a true automation lever. Three-way matching, approval workflows, exception handling, and supplier onboarding. The goal is hands-off AP processing.

Good fit

Who this is for

  • Finance teams that have gone live on Peppol and want to compound the win across AP and AR.
  • AP shared-service leads drowning in exceptions because matching rules were never tuned after go-live.
  • CFOs who see the go-live as step one and want measurable AP cycle-time and FTE impact.
  • Mid-market and enterprise companies where supplier behaviour varies wildly across the long tail.
Not a fit

Who it isn't for

  • Companies that have not yet gone live on Peppol (see Implementation first).
  • Single-entity businesses with fewer than 200 invoices per month. The ROI on a retainer does not justify the cost.
  • Teams looking for a one-off engagement. Automation is iterative and requires sustained attention.
Deliverables

What you get

01

Matching rule optimisation

We audit and retune three-way matching tolerances across invoice lines, goods receipts, and purchase orders. Freight-cost variance, quantity rounding, and tax-line mismatches are the usual suspects.

02

Exception triage and reduction

Systematic analysis of exception queues. We classify root causes, eliminate false positives, and build escalation paths that keep the AP team focused on genuine issues.

03

Approval workflow redesign

Rework approval routing to eliminate duplicate effort between AP and cost-centre owners. Clear RACI, threshold-based auto-approval, and mobile-friendly approval flows.

04

Supplier onboarding (long tail)

Structured onboarding programme for the supplier long tail. Template communications, follow-up cadences, and Peppol registration support for suppliers who are not yet electronic.

05

KPI dashboard and reporting

Monthly KPI dashboard tracking auto-match rate, AP cycle days, exception rate, and FTE reallocation. Trendlines, targets, and commentary included.

Anonymised customer profile. Names and figures changed. Company details available on request under NDA.

Case study

French industrial group, post go-live

Client profile
Type
Industrial group
Headcount
~1,200 staff
ERP
SAP S/4HANA
Peppol status
Post go-live
Buyer: AP shared-service lead + CFO|Country: France|Pain: AP exceptions post go-live

The situation

A French industrial group with approximately 1,200 staff went live on Peppol six months ago. The technical pipeline works. Invoices flow. But the AP team is drowning in exceptions. Matching rules were configured at go-live and never revisited. Supplier behaviour varies wildly across the long tail. The AP shared-service lead is spending more time on exception handling than before the go-live.

The CFO expected automation gains by now. Instead, the team is handling more manual work than before because every variance triggers an exception. The pipeline is live but the process is not optimised.

What an Automation engagement covers for this profile

In an Automation engagement for this profile we would start with a baseline assessment of current auto-match rates, AP cycle time, exception volume, and FTE allocation. The baseline typically reveals that matching tolerances are set too tight and that the exception queue is dominated by a small number of systematic root causes.

We would retune matching rules against historical invoice data, reclassify the exception queue by root cause, and redesign approval routing to eliminate the duplicate handoffs between the AP team and cost-centre owners. In parallel, we would launch a structured supplier onboarding programme for the long tail that never completed the transition to electronic invoicing.

A monthly KPI dashboard tracks auto-match rate, AP cycle days, exception rate, and FTE reallocation against agreed targets. The dashboard is the single source of truth for the CFO.

What commonly goes sideways

For a profile like this, the most common issues we would address in the engagement include:

Matching tolerances too tight

Three-way matching tolerance was set too tight at go-live. Every freight-cost variance becomes an exception. The AP team spends hours on variances that should auto-clear.

Supplier long tail incomplete

Supplier onboarding never finished the long tail. Hundreds of low-volume suppliers still send PDFs or paper. Each one generates manual work that erodes the automation gains.

Approval workflow duplication

Approval-workflow rules duplicate work between the AP team and cost-centre owners. Both sides review the same invoices. No clear RACI. Cycle time inflates without adding control.

The engagement outcome

In an engagement for this profile we would target an auto-match rate above 92% within six months, up from the ~50% observed at baseline. AP cycle time typically drops 60-70%. The AP shared-service lead gets 1.5 to 2.5 FTE back for higher-value work. The KPI dashboard gives the CFO a clear, monthly view of the return on the automation investment.

Indicative outcomes
AP cycle time −60–70%

end-to-end processing time

From invoice receipt to payment posting. Driven by matching rule optimisation and approval workflow redesign.

92%+ auto-match

typical, up from ~50%

Three-way match rate for PO-based invoices. The ceiling depends on supplier behaviour and invoice complexity.

1.5–2.5 FTE

reallocated to higher-value work

AP staff freed from exception handling and manual matching. Redeployed to vendor management, cash-flow analysis, or process improvement.

Sample deliverable
Sample artefact

Automation KPI Dashboard

Client: ████████ Industries SA

Month 6
Post go-live
Auto-match rate
92.4%▲

up from ~50% at go-live

AP cycle days
██▼

down from ██ days pre-optimisation

Exception rate
██%▼

down from ██% at baseline

FTE reallocated
2.0▲

to higher-value work

Dashboard reflects month-6 post go-live metrics. Redacted fields (██) contain client-specific data available under NDA.

Process

How we run it

1

Baseline assessment

Month 1

Measure current auto-match rate, AP cycle time, exception volume, and FTE allocation. Define target KPIs.

2

Matching rule optimisation

Month 1–2

Audit matching tolerances, retune thresholds, and test against historical invoice data. Deploy updated rules to production.

3

Exception triage

Month 2–3

Classify the exception queue by root cause. Eliminate systematic false positives. Build escalation paths and owner assignments.

4

Workflow redesign

Month 3–4

Rework approval routing, threshold-based auto-approval, and cost-centre owner assignments. Test and deploy.

5

Supplier long-tail onboarding

Month 3–6

Launch structured onboarding programme for remaining manual suppliers. Template communications, follow-up tracking, and Peppol registration support.

6

Continuous optimisation

Ongoing

Monthly KPI review, rule refinement, and ongoing exception analysis. Iterate until targets are sustained.

Investment

Format and pricing

From €4,500/month

Retainer. 6-month minimum. Final rate depends on transaction volume and ERP complexity.

Related packages

Often comes with

Operations Support

Day-to-day operational support. Inbox monitoring, PDF conversion oversight, receipt retrieval, and dispute follow-up when things go off-script.

Operations Support

Often preceded by

Implementation

End-to-end pipeline setup. Peppol registration, format mapping, ERP integration, test cycles, and supervised go-live.

Implementation
Related reading
FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Do we need to be live on Peppol first?
Yes. Automation is a post go-live engagement. If you have not yet gone live, start with an Implementation engagement. Once the pipeline is running, we optimise it.
How quickly will we see results?
Matching rule changes typically show impact within the first month. Exception rates drop over months 2 and 3 as root causes are eliminated. FTE reallocation usually becomes visible by month 4. The KPI dashboard tracks progress from day one.
What auto-match rate is realistic?
92%+ is typical for companies that started around 50%. The ceiling depends on supplier behaviour, invoice complexity, and ERP configuration. We set targets during the baseline assessment and track against them monthly.
Will you work inside our ERP?
We work with your AP team and your ERP configuration. Depending on the system, we may adjust matching rules, approval workflows, and tolerance settings directly, or guide your team through the changes. We agree on access and ownership during kickoff.
What happens after the 6-month minimum?
The retainer continues month-to-month for as long as it keeps adding value. Many clients stay on a lighter cadence after the initial optimisation push. There is no lock-in beyond the minimum.
Can you onboard suppliers who refuse to go electronic?
We can nudge them. The structured onboarding programme includes template communications and follow-up cadences. For genuinely resistant suppliers, we help you decide which ones to keep on manual channels and which to escalate via commercial leverage.
Discovery call

Discuss on a discovery call

30 minutes with a co-founder or senior e-invoicing expert. You leave the call with a clear next step. Tailored proposal in your inbox within 48 hours.

Vendor-neutral. No obligation to switch platforms.

AP Automation Advisory | Post Go-Live Optimisation | e-invoice.be