Financial Census 2026
Financial Census 2026
Late payments are still draining finance teams.
85% of finance teams have automated AP, yet 96% say late payments cause stress and burnout.
Financial Census 2026
Financial Census 2026
85% of finance teams have automated AP, yet 96% say late payments cause stress and burnout.
But the Medius Financial Census 2026 reveals a different reality. Most finance teams say they have automated accounts payable and are satisfied with their technology. At the same time, invoices are still being paid late, suppliers are changing how they work with customers, and AP teams are spending too much time chasing approvals and resolving disputes.
85% of finance teams have automated AP. So why are a third of invoices still going out late? Our 2026 Financial Census uncovers the gap between what organizations believe their AP tech is doing—and what's happening on the ground.
Finance leaders generally believe their payment processes are working:
are satisfied with their current AP technology.
are satisfied with how long it takes to pay suppliers.
report using some level of AP automation.
Yet 45% say that 21-40% of their invoices are paid late in a typical month.
That disconnect is the AP perception gap: organizations believe their automation is delivering, while their payment results, suppliers, and AP teams tell a different story.
The Census found that 46% of organizations describe their AP process as fully automated from end to end. Another 39% say they are partially automated but still rely on some manual steps.
Only 14% report having no automation at all.
The question is no longer whether finance teams have invested in AP technology. It’s whether that technology has removed enough friction to keep invoices moving without constant intervention.
When approvals still depend on email reminders, invoice data has to be corrected by hand, or teams need to switch between disconnected systems. Automation can move the bottleneck instead of removing it.
Finance professionals say the leading causes of late payments are operational, not technological.
Causes of late payments:
Internal approval bottlenecks
Insufficient cash flow management
Disputed invoices or data mismatches
Under-resourced AP teams
Poor visibility on upcoming deadlines
Approval delays are the most common problem. But they are part of a wider process issue involving unreliable data, limited visibility, competing priorities, and too much work falling back on the AP team.
Automation cannot deliver on-time payments when the processes underneath are fragmented.
Managing late payments is no small administrative inconvenience.
96% of finance professionals say late payments have contributed to stress or burnout within the AP team. More than one in four describe the impact as significant or severe.
Every delayed invoice can generate more work—from chasing approvers to managing escalations.
Late payments not only affect the finance team, they change supplier behavior.
Finance professionals report that suppliers have responded to late payments by:
are imposing stricter payment terms upfront.
are ending client replationships.
are reducing service quality or speed.
are escalating to formal dispute or legal action.
Late payment performance can therefore affect more than fees and discounts. It can weaken supplier trust, reduce negotiating power, and put access to critical goods and services at risk.
Finance teams know payment processes need to improve, but several barriers continue to get in the way:
Barriers to improving payment processes:
Too many systems and too much complexity
Other digital projects take priority
Uncertainty about available solutions
No allocated budget
Lack of internal champions or executive support
The most common barrier is complexity. Adding another system to an already fragmented environment will not necessarily help.
The goal should be to connect invoice capture, processing, approvals, and payments in one clear process, with fewer handoffs and fewer places for work to stop.