The operational reality of treasury in Europe

To understand what’s really happening, Nomentia, in collaboration with Juniper Research, surveyed 384 senior finance and treasury decision-makers across eight European countries, spanning treasury and finance leadership roles and a broad mix of industries. The research was conducted online via a structured questionnaire to capture both current practice and forward-looking strategies.

What follows is an evidence-based view of how treasury teams are operating today, where pressure is building, and what organisations are prioritising next - without losing sight of the practical constraints that shape day-to-day work.

Treasury is evolving - but operations are still catching up

The survey findings point to a clear shift: treasury’s remit is expanding beyond traditional cash and risk management toward providing more insight and support for decision-making. That change is not simply about expectations; it depends on whether the operating model and data foundation enable treasury to deliver timely, trusted answers.

This matters because “treasury maturity” shows up in tangible ways: how payments are executed, whether cash visibility is frequent and consistent, how forecasting is produced, and whether controls are embedded and monitored within systems rather than enforced informally.

Beyond spreadsheets, not yet streamlined

A common pattern emerges across the report: many treasury teams are in a transitional phase. They’ve moved beyond purely manual processes, but full end-to-end automation is still limited. Especially when processes span multiple banks, entities, and systems. As a result, teams continue to face data fragmentation and siloed workflows, with inconsistent automation that makes reconciliation harder and slows decision-making.

That transitional state has a practical consequence. The effort required to assemble a reliable picture of cash and risk can remain stubbornly high, even when a company has already made some investments in tools and connectivity.

The core constraint: complexity, cost, and disruption risk

When treasury modernisation stalls, the report highlights a consistent set of blockers. The perceived complexity of integration, the expense (or deprioritisation) of treasury investment, and concerns about disrupting daily operations. In other words, it’s rarely a question of whether improvement is desirable - it’s whether change feels achievable without introducing new operational risk.

This helps explain why many organisations favour approaches that integrate into existing environments, reduce system complexity, and deliver incremental automation without forcing wholesale replacement.

Shadow systems and duplicated work

Even where core systems exist, the report describes a persistent operational problem: shadow systems. Spreadsheets and unofficial workarounds are running in parallel with official processes. These patterns often lead to duplicated effort and a lack of confidence in “the system of record,” especially when technology layers have accumulated over time and data flows have become fragmented.

The operational impact is straightforward. Time and attention get absorbed by stitching together information, validating it, and reconciling inconsistencies - rather than using that information to guide funding, working capital decisions, and risk management.

The gap between policy and practice

Controls are another area where the report identifies a meaningful gap between intent and reality. Many teams report that standardised controls are not consistently enforced, relying instead on manual oversight or informal practices. An approach that can expose organisations to compliance breaches, uneven decision-making across entities, and reduced confidence from senior leadership over time.

The direction of travel is clear in the report’s framing. Scalable control governance is increasingly tied to embedding controls into day-to-day procedures and systems, supported by monitoring and exception-driven alerts, rather than relying on after-the-fact detection.

Priorities are shifting toward resilience, accuracy, and automation

Against this operational backdrop, the report outlines how priorities have shifted in recent years. The emphasis is moving toward automation, stronger liquidity and funding resilience, and improved forecasting accuracy, reflecting both market conditions and the growing expectation that finance and treasury support leadership with decision-ready insight.