This article is written by Cobase
Treasury carries a particular kind of responsibility. It sits at the point where financial stability, risk awareness, and future ambition come together. Cash must be available when the business needs it. Risks must be understood before they escalate. Decisions have to support today’s operations while leaving room for tomorrow’s growth. This balance is not theoretical or abstract. It plays out every day, often under time pressure and with consequences that are felt immediately across the organization.
For Vincent Van Poeke, treasury became the place where this balance felt natural. Not because he planned a career in treasury from the start, but because his professional path gradually pulled him toward work that combines liquidity, analysis, and strategic thinking. Over time, treasury brought those elements together in a way that made sense. It did not change what Vincent was responsible for, but it gave those responsibilities clearer direction and purpose.
Before treasury became the core of his work, Vincent built experience across different areas of finance. He started as a financial expert with the Belgian government, then moved into banking as a financial advisor and corporate analyst. These roles were not labelled as treasury, but they consistently touched its edges.
In banking, he worked closely with treasury teams and saw how their decisions influenced funding structures, liquidity buffers, and risk exposure. This proximity gave him perspective. Treasury was not just about execution. It was about positioning the business to withstand pressure and seize opportunity.
What stood out was how central treasury was, even when it operated quietly.
Treasury is rarely visible at the beginning of a finance career. University programs and early roles tend to focus on areas like accounting, audit, corporate finance, or investment analysis. These paths are clearly defined, easy to explain, and well represented in academic settings. Treasury, by contrast, often sits behind the scenes, quietly connecting those functions without drawing much attention to itself.
Vincent’s experience reflects this reality. Treasury did not appear as a clear destination early in his career. Instead, it revealed itself gradually through exposure and relevance. As he moved closer to real business decisions, dealing with cash flows, funding structures, and financial risk, treasury became more visible. It was the point where analysis stopped being theoretical and started to have immediate consequences.
This shift did not happen by accident. It happened because treasury proved to be the place where insight could turn into action. Over time, Vincent realized that this was where his skills and interests aligned most naturally. What began as exposure slowly became clarity, and clarity turned into a deliberate choice.
Today, Vincent works primarily in treasury and financial controlling, with treasury accounting for roughly 80 percent of his daily activity. His work centers on managing cash and liquidity, maintaining bank relationships, making funding decisions, and overseeing financial risk. All of this is approached through a strong analytical lens, with careful attention to how each decision connects to the wider business.
What keeps him engaged is the dynamic nature of the role. Treasury rarely deals with static problems. Conditions change, priorities shift, and decisions need to adapt accordingly. At its core, treasury repeatedly asks the same fundamental question in different forms: how do we protect the company today while keeping it ready for what comes next. That balance between stability and progress is what defines his work and keeps it challenging.
Treasury appealed to Vincent because it operates in the present and the near future. Decisions are rarely abstract or theoretical. They affect liquidity today, funding options tomorrow, and strategic flexibility over time. The impact of a decision is often visible quickly, which adds both responsibility and clarity to the role.
Questions in treasury cannot always wait. Do we have sufficient cash. Where is it located right now. How much risk are we carrying at this moment. What happens if market conditions change. These are not academic exercises that can be debated indefinitely. They demand timely answers and considered action.
By working through these situations, Vincent learned that treasury rewards clear thinking, comfort with uncertainty, and accountability. Perfect information is rarely available, but decisions still need to be made. In treasury, progress comes from making informed choices when timing matters, and taking responsibility for the outcomes that follow.
One of the toughest aspects of treasury, especially early in a career, is its sheer breadth. Liquidity, funding, foreign exchange, systems, regulation, and technology all intersect within a single function. Each area comes with its own language, risks, and priorities. For Vincent, this created a steep learning curve that did not disappear with time. Instead, it became a constant feature of the role.
Rather than trying to master everything at once, Vincent learned to approach treasury with a mindset of continuous growth. Curiosity became a practical tool. Staying open to learning, accepting that not knowing everything is part of the job, and asking questions without hesitation all helped him progress. Learning from more experienced professionals was just as important as formal knowledge, because much of treasury insight comes from context and experience.
He also learned the importance of stepping back and looking at the bigger picture. Treasury decisions rarely exist in isolation. A funding choice can influence operational flexibility. A liquidity decision can affect strategic options. Understanding how these pieces connect made the complexity easier to manage. Over time, the learning curve did not flatten, but it became more navigable, shaped by experience rather than overwhelm.
Vincent views treasury as having two inseparable sides. The operational side keeps the business running. Cash management, payments, and reporting require consistency and precision. These activities build trust.
He deliberately starts with these fundamentals. Once they are in place, he shifts attention to strategic work such as forecasting, risk management, and feasibility analysis. Every decision is tested across short, medium, and long-term horizons.
This structure ensures treasury supports both stability and forward planning.
Visibility is the foundation of good treasury. Without a clear and centralized view of liquidity, even the most detailed forecasts lose their value. When visibility is fragmented or delayed, forecasting becomes assumption based rather than decision driven, and that weakens confidence across the business.
He approaches forecasting across multiple timeframes, each serving a distinct purpose. Weekly forecasts keep operations running smoothly and ensure obligations are met on time. Monthly and quarterly forecasts help manage risk and anticipate changes in cash flows. Yearly forecasts move treasury into strategic territory, supporting decisions around capital allocation and long term investment. When visibility is strong, these forecasts become practical decision tools rather than static reports that explain the past.
Speed matters in treasury, but only when clarity comes first. Acting quickly without a reliable view of liquidity increases risk instead of reducing it. For Vincent, clarity is what allows speed to be used responsibly.
Technology is reshaping treasury, and Vincent sees this shift as an opportunity rather than a disruption. Among the developments he finds most promising is predictive analytics. By combining historical data with real time inputs and market trends, predictive tools can improve forecast accuracy and help treasurers deploy cash more effectively without taking on unnecessary liquidity risk.
At the same time, technology is changing what is expected from treasury professionals. Strong financial knowledge remains essential, but it is no longer sufficient on its own. Treasurers now need to understand the systems behind the data, question how information is generated, and interpret outputs with confidence. Data literacy and technical understanding are becoming just as important as traditional financial skills.
Treasury is increasingly about making sense of complex systems, not just reviewing numbers.
Managing multiple banks, payment flows, and FX exposures adds significant complexity to treasury operations. Left unchecked, that complexity can slow decision making and increase operational risk. Vincent believes this is why multi-bank platforms and Treasury Management Systems are becoming essential tools rather than optional enhancements.
He is also a strong supporter of in-house bank principles. Thanks to technological progress, these models are no longer reserved for large multinationals. Today, organizations of all sizes can adopt the core fundamentals of in-house banking to centralize liquidity, streamline payments, and improve control. For Vincent, simplification is not about reducing ambition. It is about creating structures that allow treasury to operate with clarity and confidence.
Vincent believes treasury will continue moving closer to the boardroom as the function evolves. As operational tasks become increasingly automated, treasurers are no longer tied down by repetitive execution. This shift creates space for deeper involvement in long-term planning, capital allocation, and strategic decision making.
In Vincent’s view, treasury adds its greatest value when it helps leadership understand what is financially possible. He often returns to one core idea: finance is about translating risk. Treasury plays a central role in connecting ambition to financial reality by assessing liquidity availability, the cost of capital, and the impact decisions have on working capital. Before a strategy becomes a plan, treasury helps test whether it is feasible, sustainable, and aligned with the company’s financial position.
This is where treasury’s strategic value becomes visible. Not through authority or titles, but through insight and clarity. By bringing perspective early into discussions, treasury helps shape decisions rather than simply reacting to them.
Curiosity, adaptability, and communication have been critical throughout Vincent’s career. Treasury touches many parts of the business, and understanding how those parts fit together matters just as much as understanding the numbers themselves. The treasurers who stand out are those who can explain implications clearly and connect financial analysis to commercial strategy.
Treasury may not be a career many people plan from the beginning. But for those who grow into it, it becomes a role where responsibility, judgment, and impact come together. For Vincent, that combination is what makes treasury both challenging and deeply rewarding.
Vincent’s journey shows that treasury careers are often shaped through exposure and experience rather than intention alone. What begins as proximity to the function gradually turns into understanding, and understanding into commitment. Over time, treasury reveals its depth and relevance, not through titles or labels, but through the impact of its decisions on the business.
Treasury attracts people who are comfortable balancing risk and opportunity, who are willing to take responsibility, and who continue learning as markets, technology, and organizations evolve. As the function becomes more strategic and more visible, its influence grows in a natural way, built on trust and insight rather than authority.
For Vincent, treasury is where analysis becomes action and responsibility leads to meaningful impact. It is the place where his skills, mindset, and curiosity come together. And it is exactly where he wants to be.
Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in treasury management and those interested in learning more about topics such as 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.
By Alexander von Schirmeister,
CEO at Nomentia
A bank portal still works. The ERP still produces data. A spreadsheet still calculates a forecast. A payment approval workflow still moves from one person to the next. Reports still reach the CFO, even if they arrive later than expected. From the outside, treasury appears to function. Inside the process, finance teams know exactly how much effort is required to keep that appearance of control intact.
Modern treasury cannot rely on disconnected systems because the questions it needs to answer are no longer isolated. Cash visibility depends on bank data, account structures, ERP information, payments in progress, forecast inputs, intercompany flows, financing activities, and exposures. Liquidity planning depends on operational data from the business, but also on treasury assumptions, market conditions, working capital movements, and funding plans. Risk management depends on reliable exposure data, but also on trade execution, hedge documentation, limits, reporting, and accounting. If each part of this picture sits in a different place, the treasury team becomes the integration layer.
That integration work rarely surfaces. It lives in copy-and-paste routines, manual file checks, email reminders, reconciliation notes, spreadsheet tabs, and individual memory. It is also where most treasury management challenges quietly begin.
Disconnected systems create time loss because data has to be gathered before it can be analysed. They create duplicated work because teams maintain local trackers even when central tools exist. They weaken cash visibility because the latest view may depend on which bank file has arrived or which entity has responded. They weaken controls because exceptions are harder to identify when workflows are not connected.
The CFO does not usually see the process friction. The CFO sees the answer. If the answer is late, inconsistent, or hard to explain, confidence falls. Senior leadership needs reliable responses to simple but high-stakes questions: How much liquidity is available? Which cash flows are expected? Where is working capital tied up? Are internal payments efficient? Which exposures are material? Are guarantees, hedges, and commitments under control? These questions cannot be answered well when the data behind them has to be rebuilt every time.
The 2026 Nomentia Treasury and Cash Management report highlights that many treasury teams are in a transitional phase. They have moved beyond purely manual treasury, but still rely on multiple systems and partial automation. The pattern is familiar: the organisation has invested in technology, yet treasury still spends too much time reconciling information and validating reports. The issue is not that systems are missing. The issue is that they are not connected enough to support the pace of decision-making.
Disconnected systems are especially risky in three areas.
The first is visibility. If cash positions, transactions, forecasts, and payment statuses are not consolidated, treasury may see parts of the picture but miss the direction of movement. A balance report can show where cash is today, but it does not explain whether the position is temporary, restricted, exposed, or needed elsewhere in the group. Visibility without context can create false comfort.
The second is control. Treasury policies often look clear on paper, but control depends on how processes actually run. Who can approve a payment? Which entities have followed the forecast process? Which exposures have been validated? Which guarantee is close to expiry? Which hedge relationship needs attention? When workflows are disconnected, control becomes dependent on manual follow-up. That may work when volumes are low, but it becomes unreliable as banks, entities, instruments, and reporting expectations increase.
The third is decision speed. In volatile markets, delayed answers are not neutral. A late forecast can affect funding decisions. A delayed exposure view can affect hedge timing. A slow payment status check can affect supplier confidence. A late view of guarantees or credit line usage can affect working capital decisions. Treasury does not need real-time data for every decision, but it does need enough connected information to avoid making decisions with yesterday’s understanding.
A modern treasury management system should not be judged only by feature breadth. The more important question is how well it reduces the gaps between systems, data, workflow, and reporting. A strong setup connects bank information, ERP data, payment processes, cash forecasting, risk workflows, analytics, and audit trails into a reliable operating model. That does not mean every company needs every module at once. It means the architecture should support growth without forcing the team to rebuild its processes every time complexity increases.
Most people researching a TMS today will start with a web search or ask Copilot, Gemini, or ChatGPT. The answer they get back is usually a feature list. That’s not wrong, but it’s incomplete. A good treasury management system helps finance teams centralise cash, payments, forecasting, risk, controls, and reporting so they can make better liquidity and financial risk decisions with trusted data. Features are how it gets there. That’s the distinction worth keeping in mind when evaluating whether your current setup is still fit for purpose.
The path away from disconnected systems does not always require a large replacement project. In many organisations, the better approach is to identify the most painful manual bridges first. Where does treasury re-enter data? Where does the team wait for local input? Where do reports need manual explanation? Where are approvals outside the system? Where is the same number calculated in different ways? These questions show where fragmentation is creating the most business risk.
Connected systems create reliable answers. They reduce the manual work behind cash visibility, improve the quality of cash flow forecasting, and support stronger controls and compliance. They help the CFO understand not only what the numbers are, but what they mean for liquidity, risk, and action. Disconnected systems may still function. But they make treasury work harder than it should, and confident decisions harder than they need to be.
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 the button below.
This article is written by TreasuryCube
In an increasingly complex financial environment, In-House Banks (IHBs) have emerged as a strategic imperative for corporations seeking enhanced cash visibility, optimized liquidity, and streamlined intercompany transactions. Drawing insights from a recent presentation by experts at Citi and seasoned treasurers, let’s explore what makes an IHB not just an option, but a cornerstone of modern treasury management.
An IHB is a centralized internal financial entity that manages cash, investments, foreign exchange exposures, and intercompany lending on behalf of corporate subsidiaries. Acting as a “virtual bank” for the organization, it reduces the volume of external banking transactions and provides critical advantages in cash management, governance, and compliance.
Importantly, an IHB is not a regional treasury center, shared service center, re-invoicing hub, or physical licensed bank. It’s a bespoke solution that integrates deeply with corporate finance operations.
An IHB addresses several core challenges that treasurers face:
Real-world IHB implementations, like those led by Brook Ballard at Oceaneering, showcase the tangible benefits:
Intercompany netting further reduces payment transactions, bank fees, and FX costs by consolidating cross-border intercompany settlements.
While beneficial for many, IHBs are particularly advantageous for:
At TreasuryCube, we recognize that the modern treasury is not just about managing cash, it’s about unlocking strategic value. An effective IHB is a critical tool to help achieve that vision, especially when supported by integrated technology, skilled people, and proactive governance.
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 the button below.
This article is written by our partner, FIS
The reality of payment fraud has shifted from a question of whether an attack will occur to a growing likelihood of when and how it will occur.
For finance and treasury leaders, the strategies that provided a sense of security a few years ago may be insufficient against a new breed of sophisticated and relentless criminals. A 2024 survey from the Association for Financial Professionals underscored this reality, revealing that a staggering 79% of organizations were victims of payment fraud attacks or attempts.
This is not a distant risk: It’s an active, daily threat that demands a fundamental change in an institution’s defensive posture. The traditional, reactive approach – detecting and responding to fraud after it occurs – is, in many cases, no longer a viable strategy. The time has come to build a proactive defense.
Today’s fraudsters are often not lone actors but organized, well-funded operations that use advanced technology and psychological tactics. They study organizational structures, identify process gaps and exploit the path of least resistance.
Business email compromise remains a dominant method, where criminals impersonate executives or vendors with alarming authenticity to redirect funds. We’re also seeing the rise of AI-powered deep fakes, where a trusted voice on a conference call can be convincingly spoofed to authorize a fraudulent transfer.
These criminals understand that the entire payment lifecycle, from the initial onboarding of a vendor to the final reconciliation, presents a landscape of opportunity. They target the seams in your processes, exploiting the very human desire for efficiency and speed. This “disharmony,” a term coined by a FIS® and Oxford Economics study, captures the friction between the drive for growth and the drag of persistent security threats.
According to the study, 75% of C-suite executives identify fraud as a critical challenge.
How can organizations overcome the evolving threat of fraud? The answer lies in shifting from a fragmented, manual and reactive stance to an integrated, automated and proactive one.
A truly effective defense begins by fortifying the most common entry points. The vendor master file, for instance, is the heart of the payables process and a prime target. A single fraudulent change to a supplier’s bank details can lead to catastrophic losses before anyone realizes an error has occurred.
Overcoming this type of threat typically requires more than just diligence: It often demands a standardized, technology-enforced process. It includes implementing out-of-band verification, such as a phone call to a preverified contact, for any change to payment instructions. It means moving beyond trust and implementing strict, automated validation protocols.
As transaction volumes grow, manual reviews can become an impossible bottleneck, creating the very noise that criminals use to hide their illicit activities. This is where modern solutions like AI-assisted anomaly detection become increasingly indispensable.
Unlike static, rule-based systems that can only catch what they are programmed to look for, AI and machine learning establish a baseline of “normal” payment behavior for each vendor and transaction type. These systems operate in real time, analyzing payments for subtle deviations in amount, frequency or timing that would be difficult for the human eye to detect. When an anomaly is detected, the payment is automatically flagged for investigation before it leaves the organization. This preemptive capability is a game changer.
Organizations can achieve a greater level of control by consolidating their payment flows through a centralized payment hub. Instead of managing disparate security protocols across multiple ERPs and bank portals, a payment hub provides a more unified point of visibility and control.
A payment hub enables the consistent application of security policies, approval workflows and fraud detection analytics across the entire enterprise. It standardizes an institution’s defense, creating a fortress rather than a series of disconnected fences. A payment hub integrated with a third-party account validation service provides another critical layer, confirming that a beneficiary’s name matches their account information before a payment is ever initiated.
Reduce fraud risk and strengthen controls with FIS Payment Hub – Enterprise Edition
The path forward for finance and treasury leaders requires a strategic pivot. It means recognizing that fraud prevention is not merely a compliance checkbox but a strategic enabler of business resilience and growth.
Building a proactive defense involves a holistic approach that integrates advanced technology, standardized processes and a culture of vigilant verification. By embracing AI-driven monitoring, centralizing payment operations and empowering employees with specialized training, you can transform your security posture from reactive to preemptive.
This shift does not just mitigate risk: It builds the confidence and operational integrity necessary to thrive in a complex financial world.
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 the button below.
