While much of the discussion has focused on the operational impact of supply chain unpredictability, the bigger challenge is financial. The organizations that will navigate this period most successfully will not necessarily be those with the lowest costs or the largest supplier networks. They will be the ones with the agility to respond when conditions change. For CFOs, that means rethinking how working capital, liquidity and supplier resilience fit into the broader financial operating model.
For many years, finance leaders have focused on efficiency. Optimizing working capital, improving cash conversion cycles and reducing funding costs have all been critical priorities. While these remain important, recent market conditions suggest that resilience deserves equal attention.
The reality is that sudden tariff increases or regulatory changes rarely affect a single organization in isolation. Their impact is often felt throughout an entire supply chain. Suppliers face higher costs, margins come under pressure, and access to liquidity becomes increasingly important.
Recent research from SAP Taulia’s Supplier Survey highlights this shift. Only 46% of suppliers now identify growth as their primary focus, down from 53% a year ago. At the same time, 66% are interested in early-payment solutions to improve liquidity.
These figures tell an important story. Suppliers are becoming more focused on preserving financial stability than pursuing expansion. That should matter to every CFO.
A financially constrained supplier is less able to absorb unexpected costs, invest in growth, or adapt when market conditions change. The effects rarely remain isolated. They can influence pricing, lead times, inventory availability, and ultimately business performance. For finance leaders, supplier resilience is increasingly becoming a strategic consideration as opposed to simply a procurement concern.
Many large organizations continue to manage working capital using frameworks designed for a more stable environment.
Forecasts are often built around assumptions that remain fixed for months at a time. Payment-term strategies are designed to optimize cash positions under normal operating conditions. Treasury, procurement, and supply chain teams frequently operate against separate objectives. The challenge is that volatility rarely respects organizational boundaries.
In these situations, annual planning cycles and static assumptions become less effective. Instead, finance leaders need to build greater adaptability into their decision-making processes as scenario planning becomes increasingly important. Treasury teams need to understand not only how changes affect their own liquidity position, but also how they affect suppliers, customers and broader trading ecosystems.
Predicting every possible outcome is obviously impossible; the goal is to ensure the business can respond quickly when circumstances change.
One trend likely to accelerate over the coming years is closer collaboration between treasury, procurement and supply chain functions. Historically, these teams have often operated independently. Treasury focused on liquidity; procurement focused on cost and supplier relationships; and supply chain teams focused on operational continuity. In a more volatile trade environment, operating within these traditional silos is no longer viable, as these priorities are increasingly interconnected.
A sourcing decision can have significant working capital implications. A supplier experiencing financial pressure can create operational risks. A liquidity decision can influence the stability of the supply base. This is why real-time visibility is becoming a baseline requirement.
Organizations need a clearer understanding of supplier health, cash flow pressures and emerging risks across their networks. They need forecasting processes that incorporate external market developments alongside internal financial data. Most importantly, they need mechanisms that not only identify hidden liquidity within the business but enable it to be deployed quickly, strengthening supplier resilience, protecting strategic relationships, and putting existing cash to work more effectively.
For some businesses, that may mean expanding supply chain finance programs. For others, it may involve dynamic discounting, alternative payment structures, or closer collaboration with strategic suppliers. The specific approach will vary by business, but the objective remains the same: creating resilience and optionality rather than relying on fixed assumptions.
Preparing for a more volatile future
CFOs are justified in asking: What happens if trade conditions don’t stabilize? But the truth appears to be that trade conditions are unlikely to stabilize any time soon. However, the strongest operating models are rarely optimized for a single set of conditions.
Trade policies will continue to change. Supply chains will continue to evolve. New geopolitical and economic pressures will emerge. The businesses that thrive will be those that can adjust quickly without compromising financial performance or supplier relationships. Agility and flexibility are two aspects that CFOs must prioritize over all else.
For finance leaders, that requires a broader perspective. It means looking beyond traditional efficiency metrics and recognizing that working capital decisions increasingly influence supplier stability, operational continuity and long-term performance.
In a more volatile trading environment, financial strength across the supply chain increasingly determines how effectively businesses can respond to disruption, support key partners and seize new opportunities. The organizations that succeed will be the ones that have built operating models capable of adapting as conditions evolve.
Rene Ho is CFO at SAP Taulia.