What’s inside: output checking · access rules
The question this file answersWhen the payment file leaves for the bank, who has actually checked that every line is an approved invoice?
Fits: finance teams handling 500–5,000+ invoices and receipts a month.
Typical pattern, not a measured desk. The finance playbook's AP desk sees 500–5,000+ invoices a month but publishes no count for payment runs. The run is built in a spreadsheet, uploaded to the bank portal, and trusted to contain only approved invoices. It hurts when the approver is away.
On run day the AP lead opens a short list of lines that failed a check — a changed bank account, a duplicate, an amount that drifted — rather than re-reading the whole file. Treasury still releases the payment, and the log shows which lines were checked and by what rule.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
the same three-way build as AP invoice matching — no published figure for payment runs
Before: a spreadsheet, a portal and hope that the approved invoice is the one in the file. After: each line is matched to invoice and approval before upload; breaks wait on a person. No percentage — the AP figures are about invoices, and they live on the parent file.
Ardent Partners (2023) and IOFM (2023) measure invoice processing, not payment-run checking, so their 50–70% stays on the AP file and this one carries no percentage. Not a fraud-loss claim.
Your ERP and bank portal stay — Oracle, SAP, Dynamics or whatever pays your suppliers today. This is the same three-way checking build as our AP invoice matching, pointed at the run:
The upload itself remains yours.
New beneficiaries. Urgent payments. Dual control on release. Anything treasury must own.
Not a fraud-loss claim.
If vendor bank details in your master are stale, every line for that vendor breaks and the first runs produce a long review list before it settles. New beneficiaries and urgent payments are excluded by rule and stay under dual control; this build checks the run, it does not release it.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Finance.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.