Treasury transformation is not a technology purchase. It’s a structured redesign of how treasury operates, governs financial risk and supports decision-making.
But it can go wrong, and often, that’s because the execution is flawed. How should change be delivered, and by who?
Treasury transformation does not fail because treasurers lack knowledge but when change is not governed with discipline
1. Establish clear ownership
Ownership, scope clarity, requirements, formal approval and controls are not optional. They are essential.
2. Formalise commitment
Core documentation should be formally reviewed by the project manager and approved by the sponsor before delivery begins. Without explicit sign off, documentation becomes reference material rather than commitment.
3. Define scope before defining timelines
The project initiation document should define:
4. Translate scope into requirements
If the objective is daily cash visibility, requirements should specify automated bank statement retrieval, defined reporting ownership and reconciliation controls. If the objective is payment control, requirements should specify segregation of duties, approval hierarchies and audit trail retention. Requirements must be specific, testable and complete.
5. Data integrity
Data integrity is a common failure point. Treasury data spans systems and spreadsheets. Without structured cleansing as a defined workstream, new systems replicate legacy inconsistencies. Data cleansing needs ownership, milestones and measurable completion criteria.
6. Map the current operating model
This step is often rushed or overlooked. Transformation cannot begin without an accurate understanding of how the treasury operates today. What is written in policy and operating manuals rarely reflects operational reality. Informal workarounds, spreadsheet bridges and undocumented approvals can often sit beneath the surface. Without mapping the current operating model (COM), redesign is based on assumption rather than evidence.
7. Design the target operating model
The target operating model (TOM) must be derived from validated requirements and informed by the COM. It must be deliverable. It should specify roles, reporting lines, approval structures, decision rights and control frameworks. A responsible, accountable, consulted, informed (RACI) matrix removes ambiguity.
8. Govern actively
Most programmes do not collapse. They drift. The red, amber and green (RAG) reporting must reflect reality, and the risk, assumptions, issues and dependencies (RAID) log must operate as a live control tool with named owners and resolution dates. Steering forums must function as decision forums. If scope expands, authority and budget must expand with it. Governance failure rarely appears dramatic. It emerges incrementally through softened reporting and delayed approvals. Left unchecked, delivery starts to drift.
9. People dynamics decide the outcome
Treasury transformation is behavioural before it is structural. Systems do not deliver transformation. People do.
10. Proof of concept first
Treasury capability should be introduced incrementally. Large programmes often fail because change is rolled out before it has been proven in practice. Where a treasury management system is involved, configuration must follow validated process design. Systems enable the operating model; they do not define it. Waterfall and agile methodologies both support this principle. The discipline is constant: prove capability before scaling.
Treasury transformation does not fail because treasurers lack knowledge but when change is not governed with discipline.
Delivery requires pragmatism. Do not chase perfection at the delivery stage. A controlled, functioning solution used consistently is better than a perfect design that never embeds.
Perfection can follow once delivery is stable. Capability matures through iteration, not upfront precision. Clarity, discipline and people determine the outcome.
Gautam Dhillon is a treasury and finance transformation specialist with more than 20 years’ experience across banking, commodity trading and corporates
A version of this article first appeared in The Treasurer magazine, Issue 2 2026
