A LinkedIn post by Eleanor Hill about ethics in the treasury market (Read it here ) triggered us to join the discussion and express our opinion on ethics in the interim market.
Companies expect more from interim treasury professionals than ever before. They want someone who can walk in on Monday, understand the business by Tuesday, fix cash visibility by Wednesday, calm down the CFO by Thursday, and somehow also know the details of Kyriba workflows, SAP connectivity, hedge accounting, ISO 20022, bank negotiations, cash pooling structures, and probably how to repair the office coffee machine because apparently treasury people are now operational Swiss army knives.
At the same time, the interim hiring market often behaves as if treasury expertise is a commodity. Which is slightly absurd when you think about it. You would not hire a surgeon through keyword bingo and a 12% LinkedIn match score. Yet treasury hiring regularly turns into:
“Candidate has seen SAP once in 2019. Perfect.”
All this in turn, creates an ethical debate that the treasury world does not talk about enough.
Treasury Is Not a Generic Back Office Function
Treasury is one of the few departments where a bad hire can create immediate financial damage.
A weak marketing hire might create a disappointing campaign.
A weak treasury hire can:
- break payment processes,
- damage bank relationships,
- create FX exposure,
- miss covenant reporting,
- disrupt liquidity structures,
- or introduce fraud and control risks.
Yet many treasury recruitment processes are still driven by generalist recruitment models. Large agencies often work at volume, relying heavily on CV scanning and keyword matching. The problem is simple: treasury looks easy from the outside. After all its just: “Cash management”, “Payments,” ”Banking”.
Sounds straightforward enough. Until someone discovers the difference between operational treasury and strategic treasury halfway through an implementation project worth millions. Humanity continues its proud tradition of underestimating specialist knowledge right until the invoice arrives.
The Ethical Problem Nobody Likes Discussing
Many companies hiring interims expect consultant-level expertise, transformation capabilities, stakeholder management, technical system knowledge, strategic insight, operational execution, and immediate impact.
Still, in many cases, the initial selection process is handled by people with limited understanding of treasury itself.
As a result, critical nuances are missed when evaluating candidates and their actual experience.
Because when a recruiter does not truly understand treasury, they cannot properly assess:
- technical depth,
- project complexity,
- system experience,
- banking infrastructure knowledge,
- or whether a candidate actually implemented something, versus merely attending status meetings for six months while nodding professionally on Teams calls.
The consequences are significant. Strong treasury professionals are filtered out for the wrong reasons, while weak candidates are presented with confidence they have not earned. Clients lose time, money, and credibility. Interim professionals walk into environments shaped by unrealistic expectations and poorly defined requirements.
In the end, nobody benefits – except perhaps LinkedIn engagement metrics.
Ethics Also Apply to Interims Themselves
The conversation should not focus solely on recruiters; interim professionals also carry the ethical responsibility.
Treasury is built on trust. When someone claims expertise in areas such as hedge accounting, TMS implementations, bank connectivity, in-house banking, cash pooling, liquidity forecasting, or ERP integrations, that expertise should extend beyond PowerPoint level.
The market has become increasingly noisy. Buzzwords often travel faster than actual competence, and AI-polished CVs are only amplifying the problem. Suddenly, everyone presents themselves as a “transformation expert.” In some cases, the transformation amounted to little more than changing the font in a cash report from Arial to Calibri.
The strongest interims understand the value of honesty. They know when to say:
“I’ve supported this area, but I’m not the lead expert.”
Ironically, that level of transparency is often what earns the greatest trust from clients.
Treasury Needs More Domain-Led Hiring
The strongest treasury hiring processes involve people who genuinely understand treasury itself – not only HR, procurement, or recruitment teams focused primarily on placement targets.
That expertise matters because treasury roles are highly nuanced. Operational treasury is fundamentally different from strategic treasury. Project-based treasury work requires a different skill set than BAU treasury. A strong cash manager is not automatically a risk manager. Experience with SAP Treasury is not the same as experience with Kyriba. And implementing a TMS is entirely different from simply using one.
To treasury professionals, these distinctions are obvious. Outside the treasury world, however, they are often reduced to a single vague category:
“Finance professional with banking experience.”
Which is about as accurate as describing both a bicycle and a Boeing 747 as “transport solutions.”
The Market Is Maturing
The good news is that the treasury interim market is becoming more sophisticated.
Companies are increasingly looking for specialist expertise, proven implementation experience, realistic assessments, and trusted niche partners rather than simply maximizing CV volume. That shift is healthy for the profession.
Treasury has never been just a numbers function. As mentioned earlier, it is about trust, control, strategy, and increasingly, technology as well.
The way treasury professionals are hired should evolve alongside the expectations placed upon them. Because when expertise is treated as interchangeable, organizations often realize its true value only after something goes wrong.
And historically, corporate finance has had a remarkable talent for learning that lesson the hard way.
Where Pecunia Fits In
This is exactly the gap that Pecunia Treasury & Finance BV tries to fill.
Not by sending clients 40 random CVs and hoping one survives the process. Treasury is already complicated enough without turning hiring into another reconciliation exercise.
At Pecunia, treasury professionals speak with treasury professionals. That matters when discussing TMS implementations, cash pooling, bank connectivity, FX and hedge accounting, liquidity structures, treasury transformations, or the difference between someone who “worked near treasury” and someone who can independently run a treasury function.
We believe treasury hiring should be based on expertise, transparency, and realism; even when that means challenging a client, rejecting a poor match, or advising a company that they do not need an interim at all.
Because treasury is too specialised, too critical, and too risky for volume-driven recruitment models. Companies do not need more CVs.
They need people who actually understand treasury.
