Scenario: A global manufacturer is evaluating banking partners as it consolidates treasury services across six countries.
RFP Response Example
Cash & Liquidity Structure
RFP Requirement 1
Describe your recommended cash and liquidity-management structure, including account rationalization, liquidity concentration, reporting and any country-specific considerations.
Compliant response
The responding bank provides a comprehensive suite of cash-management and liquidity capabilities designed to help multinational organizations improve visibility and optimize working capital.
Available capabilities include operating accounts, concentration accounts, automated sweeps, liquidity structures, balance reporting and account-rationalization support.
Following award, treasury specialists would review the buyer’s existing account structure and recommend an appropriate future-state approach across the six participating countries.
How Informed Pursuit shapes the response
Understand the buyer
The manufacturer needs centralized treasury visibility without undermining necessary local operations.
Understand the decision
The evaluator needs to understand how consolidation, exceptions and operational constraints will be assessed.
Shape the position
Demonstrate how a common treasury model can coexist with intentional, governed local exceptions.
Validate the evidence
Confirm banking capabilities, jurisdictional feasibility, account structures and reporting functionality before making final commitments.
Writer-Ready Brief
The strategic instructions used to build the response.
- Buyer context
- The buyer is not pursuing centralization for its own sake. Treasury wants stronger group-wide visibility and control while preserving local structures that remain operationally necessary.
- Solution direction
- Do not promise maximum consolidation before country requirements have been validated.
- Strategic emphasis
- Show that standardization and local flexibility can coexist within one governed operating model.
- Proof needed
- Validate banking capabilities, jurisdictional feasibility, account structures and reporting functionality before final commitments.
Competitive response
The buyer’s objective is not simply to reduce the number of bank accounts. The larger opportunity is to create a treasury structure that gives the central team stronger visibility and control while preserving the local arrangements required to operate effectively in each market.
The proposed approach will therefore begin with a common target model rather than assuming an identical structure across all six countries. Existing accounts will be classified by purpose, material payment and collection flows will be mapped, areas of cash fragmentation will be identified, and local operating or regulatory constraints will be confirmed before recommending closure, conversion or retention.
Where appropriate, the target design will use designated operating and concentration accounts, automated liquidity structures and centralized reporting to improve visibility of available cash. Local accounts or processes that remain necessary will be treated as intentional exceptions within the global model rather than unmanaged deviations from it.
The resulting design principle is straightforward: standardize where there is value, preserve local flexibility where there is a reason, and make the exceptions visible.
What changed?
From listing banking capabilities to showing how centralized visibility and local operability can coexist.
See the thinking behind this response
The stronger response does not simply add more banking terminology.
It shows how the proposed capabilities would be applied to the buyer’s competing priorities:
- centralized visibility
- greater control
- continued local operability
The RFP requirement did not change. The context available to the writer did.
Next: Multi-Country Implementation
How can six countries transition without exposing payment operations to unnecessary disruption?