Why business buyers want electronic invoicing now

Persistent friction in B2B payment processes despite digitisation

Business-to-business payments are still far from frictionless. Even with years of digital investment, organisations are facing inefficiencies in how money moves between buyers and suppliers. Many order-to-cash workflows rely on legacy systems that don’t talk to each other. Automation has improved individual steps, but end‑to‑end integration remains weak. When data fails to flow between systems, finance teams step in manually, which slows everything down and adds cost.

The challenge isn’t technology, it’s how systems are aligned. Businesses have automated certain tasks but left the larger process fragmented. True digital transformation requires consistency: data flowing freely across procurement, invoicing, ERP, and payment systems. Without that, automation creates local efficiency but global friction.

For executives, this means digital transformation must move beyond tool adoption. It requires redesigning workflows so that automation has a consistent logic across departments and partners. Investments in integration and process governance drive operational performance far more effectively than isolated technology deployments.

A recent Censuswide survey commissioned by TreviPay, covering 550 business buyers in the UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Australia, shows how widespread these issues are. Thirty percent of respondents reported incorrect invoices. Thirty‑one percent cited limited ERP integration and another 31% mentioned inconsistent invoice formats. Delays in approval workflows affected 34% of respondents. These numbers show how partial digitalization still leaves room for inefficiency and error at scale.

Inez Berkhof-Hollander, Vice-President for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa at TreviPay, summed this up well. She said finance teams today “are under pressure” not just from cashflow constraints but also from new regulations defining how invoicing must be handled. Her point underscores the growing complexity for finance departments navigating operational performance and compliance at the same time.

Standardisation through e-invoicing as a strategic enabler

Invoicing standards might sound technical, but they represent a strategic shift in global trade efficiency. When systems follow the same standard, everything works faster and with fewer errors. The UK government’s plan to mandate e‑invoicing for all VAT invoices by 2029 shows how significant this shift will be. The initiative, which begins in 2025, aims to create a simplified, automated, and interoperable framework for both local and international transactions.

Businesses consulted by the government highlighted that consistent standards reduce administrative burden and ensure compliance across borders. The Peppol framework, already used in several countries, gives companies a shared language for digital transactions. This means fewer format errors, clearer audit trails, and faster trade settlements. Standardisation isn’t about checking a compliance box; it’s about unlocking operational speed and predictability.

For business leaders, the key takeaway is strategic alignment. Governments are setting the pace for digital trade, and companies that prepare early will benefit from reduced friction and stronger interoperability. Aligning with these standards can turn compliance into operational advantage. It allows finance and operations teams to work with real-time visibility and minimal friction, which is essential as supply chains become more global and integrated.

Alex Harris, Parts Sales Manager at DAF Trucks, expressed this viewpoint clearly. His company, which operates in both the Netherlands and the UK, is waiting for final confirmation on the UK’s e‑invoicing format before integrating it into their systems. “We’re waiting for the UK authorities to decide exactly what the direction is in terms of the format, then obviously we will incorporate that into our own development,” he said. Since the Netherlands already uses Peppol, adopting a similar standard in the UK would let DAF develop a unified invoicing system that works across both countries.

This is how standardisation becomes a strategic enabler: not a regulatory burden, but a foundation for more streamlined, scalable, and transparent business operations. For executives, preparing the infrastructure, partnerships, and systems now will define who leads in the next decade of digital trade.

Size-dependent priorities in financial process management

Company size determines how financial operations are managed and optimized. Larger enterprises tend to focus on integration, governance, and control. Their transaction volumes and compliance requirements demand structured processes and full visibility across complex systems. Centralized ERP integration ensures accuracy and control at scale, helping them minimize risk and maintain compliance across multiple markets and lines of business.

Mid-sized firms, in contrast, look for speed and adaptability. Their growth models depend on agility, the ability to process payments quickly, respond to new opportunities, and avoid the heavy administrative overhead that comes with over-centralization. For them, flexibility in payment processing and invoicing systems delivers more value than the deep structural governance large organizations require.

For executives, the takeaway is strategic alignment: investment in finance technologies should match the organization’s operating model. Large corporations gain the most from integrated infrastructure that delivers precision, oversight, and regulatory confidence. Medium-sized firms should prioritize platforms that enable quick deployment, minimal complexity, and scalability. This distinction affects not only operational efficiency but also how finance teams contribute to business growth and strategic decision-making.

While the TreviPay-commissioned survey didn’t cite specific new statistics here, it highlighted the clear split between control-oriented priorities of large enterprises and the speed-oriented needs of medium-sized organizations. Understanding this difference allows finance leaders to select and design systems that truly complement how their business operates, rather than forcing a one-size-fits-all approach that slows progress.

Limited strategic integration of artificial intelligence in finance

Artificial intelligence holds promise for financial operations, yet most organizations still use it tactically rather than strategically. Many apply AI to automate narrow tasks, data entry, invoice matching, or fraud detection, without embedding it across end-to-end financial processes. As a result, AI delivers incremental efficiencies but stops short of transforming how finance functions operate.

The real opportunity lies in integrating AI across the order-to-cash lifecycle. This level of adoption can deliver real-time insights, predictive analytics, and proactive risk management. It helps finance teams move from reactive problem-solving to preventive and data-driven execution. The technology to do this exists; what’s missing in many organizations is a cohesive plan and the talent to execute it.

Executives should view AI not just as automation, but as a decision-enabling system. In finance, that means using AI for forecasting, credit analysis, and performance optimization. To reach that point, businesses must bridge the gap between IT and finance departments and ensure that their teams understand both the technical and operational dimensions of AI integration. Strategic use of data is what ultimately differentiates early adopters from those simply testing tools in isolation.

According to the TreviPay-commissioned survey, 20% of companies with over 500 employees aim to leverage AI to streamline financial processes and reduce manual labor. Only 9% of firms with 100–200 employees share the same goal. This indicates a maturity gap: larger organizations are further ahead in exploring AI-led transformation, while smaller firms are still assessing where it fits within their operations. As adoption evolves, those who strategically integrate AI throughout their finance systems will gain stronger control over costs, compliance, and data-driven decision-making.

Concerns over regulatory compliance and internal expertise in digital finance

A major obstacle for organizations advancing in digital finance is the shortage of internal expertise to manage compliance and evolving regulations. Many companies have automated parts of their order-to-cash process but lack the in-house knowledge to ensure these systems fully comply with national and international standards. As governments introduce new e‑invoicing requirements and tighter controls on data reporting, finance teams face increasing pressure to keep processes legally sound and technologically current.

This compliance burden is not confined to large enterprises. Mid-sized firms, which may lack dedicated compliance departments, are particularly vulnerable when regulations change quickly. Without the right expertise, their teams often need to rely on external consultants or delay upgrades to stay compliant. This reactive approach increases costs and creates inconsistencies in digital operations.

For business leaders, the message is clear: invest in skills development before regulatory pressure forces the issue. Upskilling finance teams in digital standards and compliance procedures ensures long-term resilience. Executives should also evaluate strategic partnerships with technology providers who specialize in compliance automation. These partnerships can provide the necessary technology and knowledge base to keep processes aligned with regulation while minimizing disruption.

The TreviPay-commissioned survey found that almost all respondents expressed concern over their teams’ lack of internal expertise and the difficulty of keeping pace with regulatory compliance demands. This near-universal concern shows that talent and compliance readiness are now central to digital finance strategy. Strengthening these areas will not only reduce regulatory risk but also ensure that digital transformation efforts in finance deliver sustained, measurable value.

Key takeaways for decision-makers

• Close the integration gap in B2B finance: Automation alone is not solving friction in payments. Leaders should prioritize full system integration and process redesign to eliminate manual intervention and improve cashflow reliability.
• Use standardisation as a competitive advantage: Adopting e‑invoicing standards like Peppol will streamline operations and ensure cross‑border compliance. Early alignment with mandates such as the UK’s 2029 VAT e‑invoicing rule can create lasting efficiency gains.
• Align finance priorities with company scale: Large enterprises should invest in governance‑driven financial systems, while mid‑sized firms should focus on agile, fast‑deploying tools. Tailoring financial operations to business size maximizes both speed and control.
• Move from AI adoption to AI integration: Artificial intelligence should support strategic decision‑making. Executives must embed AI throughout finance processes to improve accuracy, reduce costs, and strengthen forecasting.
• Invest in compliance skills and partnerships: The lack of internal regulatory expertise threatens digital finance progress. Leaders should upskill finance teams and partner with compliance‑focused technology providers to ensure resilience and readiness for changing regulations.