The 5 Most Common Selection Failures and How to Avoid Them

And that poor selection was compounded by an implementation that was doomed before it began. You can’t “out-implement” a poor selection.

Unfortunately, this happens more often than most people think. In fact, many treasury technology projects end in “no decision,” and even among those that do move forward, a significant percentage of treasurers say they are unhappy with the outcome.

Why?

Because treasury teams frequently make the same avoidable mistakes during the selection process.

Once you know what these mistakes are, they’re surprisingly easy to avoid.

Let’s walk through the most common errors treasury teams make when selecting a TMS.

We’ve already talked about how a selection project should be run. Our ERR NOT™ Methodology is designed to keep you on “track,” but keep these common errors in mind so that you’ll be sure to avoid them.

ERR NOT™ addresses the real number one reason companies don’t select the best-fit system: not having a clear understanding of the current treasury technology marketplace, the segments, and how the products are positioned and marketed.

That one is hard to correct all by yourself; therefore, this is going to focus on the five that you can correct!

Want ≠ Need.

Many companies begin serious demos without having a written, prioritized list of requirements. They rely on general ideas like:

• “We want better visibility”
• “We need forecasting”
• “We want automation”
• or my favorite, “We need to do something with AI”

We’ve all heard some version of this advice, “When you write down a goal, it becomes more tangible. You are more likely to stay focused on it and more likely to achieve it.” I believe the same is true with your treasury technology goals.

Start with what you are trying to accomplish. Then be honest about what your current state is versus the future state you have in mind. What it takes to fill that gap is the basis of your requirements. Often the list begins with things like this:

• Automated previous day balance & transaction reporting from 10 banks; intraday balance and transaction reporting from 5 of them.
• Ability to reconcile previous day transactions vs the previous day cash position.
• Ability to automatically pull A/R and A/P data from your ERP to add to bank transactions to set a cash position and a short-term forecast.
• Ability to compare forecast vs forecast and forecast vs actual for a user-defined period.
• And possibly many more.

When you see a demo, you must keep yourself from being overly impressed by things that don’t help meet the requirements. Ask yourself:

• Was that feature on my must-have list?
• Does it solve one of my real problems?
• Or was it simply interesting, cool, with a “wow” factor?

Writing down and prioritizing requirements takes some time, but it is one of the most important steps in the selection process.

Do this before serious demos begin.

Great Pitch ≠ Great Product.

The second mistake treasury teams commonly make when selecting treasury technology is buying what “looks good.”

Think about it as if the various treasury management systems were people. Many seemingly beautiful people are only so on the outside. Just like how someone may not catch your eye at first, but when you get to know them, they have amazing personalities that you find infinitely attractive.

Systems can be the same way. Some have flashy dashboards, a beautiful UX (user experience), and features that make everyone watching the demo say, “wow”, “cool”, or “fire.” (Pick the one that fits your generation…lol).

But those can be distractions. How does the system really work? What are the workflows that support your requirements?

Years ago, when I was “Demo Woman,” there was a feature in the product I sold which people absolutely loved during demos. It always got attention; it looked very impressive.

But implemented clients rarely used it. It worked but just wasn’t practical for daily use. It wasn’t essential for the day-to-day job.

I’ve always remembered that, and it is something I stress to our clients. A demo is designed to show a product in its best light, and that’s a good thing. Vendors should show their technology well. But treasury teams should remember that the purpose of the demo is not to be impressed. The purpose is to determine whether the system can meet your requirements, to understand its strengths and weaknesses, and then determine how well those align with your requirements.

That is why written, prioritized requirements matter so much. They help you stay focused when the demo gets exciting.

Before you give too much weight to a beautiful dashboard or a “sexy” feature, ask yourself:

• Will our team actually use this after implementation?
• Does this solve a real treasury problem, or does it just look good in the demo?

A strong demo can tell you a lot, but only if you are focused on your requirements.

Great Salesperson ≠ Great Support/Great Product.

The next common mistake treasury teams make is choosing the winning vendor based on the salesperson they like the most. There is an old sales adage that people buy from people they like. And that’s true, but should it be?

When it comes to treasury technology, liking the salesperson should not be a factor. You are not buying the salesperson; you are subscribing to software. You are entering into a relationship with the vendor as a company, and salespeople come and go. Your contract, however, will likely last three to five years, long after the salesperson with whom you built a relationship is gone.

This is not a criticism of salespeople; I have been the TMS salesperson, and I respect good salespeople. Being likeable, responsive, helpful, and persuasive are all part of the job. A strong salesperson helps you understand the benefits and value of the product. And their job is to make the buying process as frictionless as possible.

But your job is different. Your job is to select the system that best fits your requirements and adds the most value to your company. To do that, you must stay focused on your requirements. Do not let a great sales experience outweigh a weak functional fit.

And do not let the salesperson’s use of the latest buzzwords pull you away from what your treasury team actually needs. The only technologies that truly matter are the ones that help you achieve your goals and solve your problems.

Familiar ≠ Best Fit.

The fourth common reason companies often select a system that isn’t the very best one for them is that they opt for the “easy button” and choose:

• the name that is most familiar,
• the demo that was presented best, or
• the system that they used at their last company.

None of these will help you get the best-fit technology for your current company and current needs.

What worked well somewhere else may not work well for you now at your current company. The most familiar vendor may not be the strongest match. And the best-presented demo was likely delivered by the best-prepared demo person, which does not directly equate to the best-fit technology.

Run a serious, objective selection process. It should include at least 3-5 vendors from the correct segment(s) that most closely align with your requirements. Don’t let the promise of a quarter-end ‘special discount’ or “signing by the end of the month” cause you to rush the process to only look at 1 or 2 vendors.

Price ≠ Value.

The fifth and final common reason treasury teams don’t select the technology that is the best fit for their operations is simple: They buy on price.

Yep, they choose the Lowest-Priced option, especially when the products “kind of seem the same.”

Buying the lowest-priced option makes sense when you are buying a commodity. Remember the movie Trading Places with Eddie Murphy, Ralph Bellamy, and Dan Aykroyd? It came out in 1983 (I know, I’m showing my age). Although still funny, parts of it are definitely offensive by today’s standards. Times have changed!

But, I still remember Randolph and Mortimer teaching Billy Ray about commodities, like bacon and oranges. When two things are truly the same, price does matter. It makes perfect sense to drive an extra couple of minutes to save ten cents per gallon on gas.

But what should you do when all things aren’t equal? And treasury management systems ARE NOT all equal in their functionality or their ability to meet your requirements.

If every product still seems the same at the end of your evaluation, the selection process didn’t do its job. A well-run process makes the differences clear. It shows you the strengths and weaknesses of each system and how well they meet your requirements.

Now don’t get me wrong; price does matter. Your company has a budget, and the system needs to deliver enough value to justify the cost. But the lowest subscription or implementation cost doesn’t automatically mean the lowest total cost of ownership nor the best value.

That completes my five common selection errors

1. Not having clear, written, and prioritized requirements.
2. Buying what looks good, including beautiful dashboards and the latest technology buzzwords.
3. Buying from the salesperson you like the most.
4. Hitting the “easy button” and choosing the most familiar name or the system someone used at a previous company.
5. Buying the cheapest option because the systems mistakenly appear to be the same.

A structured, objective process leads to a confident decision & greater ROI.

Real Treasury’s ERR NOT™ methodology is designed to help treasury teams avoid these mistakes and make a clear, defensible decision based on their actual requirements.

Final Thoughts

Selecting a Treasury Management System can be a major decision.

Treasury teams that approach selection thoughtfully, getting educated and evaluating the marketplace, defining requirements, issuing a short, focused RFI and not a long, useless RFP, using a demo script tied to your requirements, and focusing on value, consistently make better decisions.

And better selection is the start of Success!

See the current market chart and its three segments, or get the 2026 Real Treasury Tech Selection Guide.