Every group chat eventually reaches the same stage:

“What time are we leaving?”
“I thought you booked it.”
“Wait, who has the tickets?”
“Didn’t Finance organise that?”
“Can someone please confirm?”

Seen by 8.

Cash flow forecasting can feel surprisingly similar.

Treasury is expected to produce a reliable view of where cash will be next week, next month or next quarter. The problem is that treasury does not control most of the activities that create those cash flows.

Sales knows when customers are likely to pay. Procurement knows what is being purchased. HR knows about payroll, bonuses, and new hires. Tax knows which payments are coming. Business units understand their operational plans.

Treasury somehow has to turn all of that information into one coherent picture of the future.

Welcome to the group chat.

Cash Flow Forecasting Is Not Just a Treasury Problem

Cash flow forecasting often sits within treasury, and for good reason. Treasury needs forecasts to manage liquidity, plan funding, identify potential cash shortages and support financial decision-making.

But owning the forecasting process is not the same as owning every number inside the forecast.

Treasury can build the model, establish assumptions, analyse variances and challenge the results. What it cannot do is magically know about every commercial decision happening across the organisation.

If Sales expects a major customer payment to arrive three weeks late, Procurement has negotiated a large supplier payment, HR is planning a significant hiring round or Tax expects an unusually large payment next month, treasury needs to know.

A cash forecast is therefore not simply a treasury document. It is the financial result of decisions being made across the entire organisation.

“I Thought Someone Else Was Sending That”

One of the biggest forecasting challenges is ownership. Who provides each input? Who checks whether it is accurate? Who tells treasury when something changes, and when should that information be provided?

Without clear responsibilities, forecasting quickly becomes an exercise in treasury chasing colleagues:

“Hi, just following up on the forecast.”
“Quick reminder on the numbers below.”
“Just bringing this back to the top of your inbox…”

At some point, the treasury professional starts sounding suspiciously like the person trying to organise dinner for twelve people.

Good forecasting requires clear data ownership. Contributors need to understand what information treasury needs from them, when it is required and why it matters.

Everyone Has Entered the Chat

Different teams bring different pieces of the cash forecasting puzzle.

Sales and Accounts Receivable often know whether customers are actually likely to pay according to invoice dates. A contract renegotiation, habitual late payer or delayed customer payment can materially change expected cash positions.

Procurement has visibility over major purchases, supplier negotiations and upcoming commitments. If treasury only discovers a significant cash outflow when the payment instruction arrives, the forecast has not really done its job.

HR can provide context around hiring plans, bonuses, restructuring and salary changes. Payroll may be relatively predictable, but workforce decisions can materially affect longer-term cash requirements.

Tax often has better visibility over the timing and size of tax payments, which can be large and irregular. Without that communication, a forecast can look perfectly comfortable until a significant tax payment suddenly appears.

Nobody enjoys that notification. Especially treasury.

Treasury: “Can Everyone Please Update the Forecast?”

Cross-functional collaboration is therefore essential, but good forecasting is not achieved by sending a spreadsheet around the organisation and hoping everyone fills in the right cells.

The process needs structure. Contributors should know what they own, when information is required and which changes are significant enough to flag immediately.

If Sales suddenly expects a €5 million receipt to move by a month, treasury should not have to discover it by manually comparing two enormous spreadsheets.

The objective is to create a process in which important information reaches treasury before it becomes a surprise.

Data Quality: Garbage In, Forecast Out

Technology can make forecasting significantly more efficient. Automated tools can consolidate data, identify patterns, analyse historical behaviour and flag anomalies. AI can also support forecasting and help teams improve assumptions.

But technology cannot completely compensate for missing or misunderstood business information.

If an expected payment date is wrong, automation simply processes the wrong date faster. If a major purchase has not been communicated, even a sophisticated model may not know it is coming.

Before asking whether treasury needs a better forecasting system, organisations should therefore also ask: Do we have a good forecasting process?

Forecast Accuracy Is Everyone’s Problem

When actual cash flows differ from the forecast, it is easy to assume treasury got the number wrong. Sometimes it did, but forecast accuracy usually depends on an entire chain of information.

A customer may have paid later than Sales expected. Procurement may have changed the timing of a purchase. A business unit may not have communicated a new expense, or an assumption may have become outdated.

Instead of only asking, “Why was the forecast wrong?”, treasury can ask: “What information would have allowed us to predict this better?”

That turns forecast accuracy from a score into a learning process. Over time, treasury can identify where information regularly arrives late, which assumptions need improvement, and which areas create the greatest uncertainty.

The goal is not necessarily to predict every euro perfectly. It is to continuously improve the organisation’s ability to see what is coming.

Treasury Should Own the Process, Not Chase the Organisation

Treasury has an important role in cash forecasting: defining the methodology, setting timelines, consolidating information, challenging assumptions and communicating the final liquidity outlook.

But it should not be responsible for creating every input itself.

A mature forecasting process gives responsibility to the people closest to the information while treasury owns the overall framework. Otherwise, forecasting becomes a monthly exercise in chasing colleagues rather than understanding future liquidity.

And treasury professionals probably have better things to do than send:

“Hi, just checking whether you saw my previous three messages…”

Better Cash Forecasting Starts With Better Conversations

Cash forecasting is often treated as a technology challenge, and technology absolutely matters. Better connectivity, automation and analytics can make the process faster and more sophisticated.

But forecasting is also fundamentally a communication challenge.

Treasury needs data, but it also needs context. It needs clear ownership, timely updates, and people across the business who understand that forecasting is not something treasury does to the organisation. It is something the organisation contributes to.

Because the best forecasting technology in the world cannot help much if half the company has left treasury on read.

Build a Better Cash Forecast With Pecunia

Strong cash flow forecasting requires the right combination of processes, data, technology, ownership and collaboration.

At Pecunia, we help organisations strengthen their treasury and cash forecasting capabilities, from improving forecasting processes and data structures to implementing technology and creating clearer responsibilities across the business.

The goal is not simply to produce another forecast. It is to create a reliable view of future liquidity that treasury can actually use to make decisions.

Want to improve your cash forecasting process? Get in touch with Pecunia and turn scattered information into clearer, more actionable treasury insights. Contact us  

And perhaps finally get everyone in the group chat to reply.