Deciding to automate invoice handling is easy; deciding what to automate is where the money is won or lost. Three measurements taken over a week point clearly at one of three fixes, and the three are not interchangeable. Skipping the measurement is how organisations buy capture to solve an approval problem.
If keying is the cost
Time ten invoices from arrival to approval and see how much of it is typing. A team keying everything into an accounting system benefits directly from capture, and the case is arithmetic rather than projection. This is the clearest justification for capture and the easiest to defend in a business case.
If waiting is the cost
Compare the minutes of work against the elapsed days. A large gap means routing and approval, not entry, and the fix is workflow with named approvers, automatic cover and escalation. It usually costs less than capture and returns faster, and it is where most teams that measure honestly find themselves.
If exceptions are the cost
Count exception reasons for a month. Dominated by missing orders and missing receipts means no software can help, because nothing can compare documents that were never created. The fix is a purchase-order threshold and receipt discipline at the delivery point, both free and both raising the ceiling for anything bought later.
Questions people ask about automate invoice
Can we do all three at once?
You can, and phasing usually lands faster. Each phase should deliver on its own rather than waiting for the next.
How long does the measurement take?
An hour a day for a week, or a sample of fifty invoices if that is easier. Either answers the question.
What if the answer is upstream?
Then the first project costs nothing, which is a good outcome even when it is not the expected one.