Ship managers’ purchasing costs are shaped well before invoices reach finance, with fragmented systems and incomplete delivery information adding work across procurement and vessel operations, according to a commentary published by The Maritime Executive. Its author, Dragos Ionescu, Marcura’s head of platform and engineering, argues that automation can connect those stages while retaining human oversight of commercial decisions.
The article describes buyers working across six systems, including email and spreadsheets, procurement software, enterprise resource planning (ERP), finance and banking platforms. It puts the time spent transferring quotations between systems at about five hours a week. Late deliveries and missing paperwork can also outweigh savings secured through a lower purchase price, particularly across large fleets and supplier networks, Ionescu writes.
Marcura estimates that a typical ship manager receives approximately 50 invoices per vessel each month, requiring around ten minutes of staff time apiece to process. For a fleet of 200 vessels, the company puts that workload at nearly 20,000 hours annually. Those figures cover straightforward invoices; discrepancies can require additional correspondence, vessel checks, record changes and delayed approvals involving several teams.
An unnamed ship manager’s internal review found that invoice-related tasks absorbed 15-20% of superintendent and fleet manager time, according to the commentary. Much of that work occurred outside finance systems. Separately, a Spectec survey of fleet operators cited in the article found that matching invoices against purchase orders and delivery records failed 60-70% of the time in maritime, with each failure costing about US$85 in staff time to pursue.
Ionescu proposes a further confirmation from vessels after goods have been counted, rather than relying solely on a signed delivery note. That additional check could identify shortages even where the invoice, order and initial delivery paperwork agree. Automated transaction validation, supplier screening and referral of discrepancies would leave exceptions needing commercial or operational judgement with staff.
The commentary presents Marcura’s Procure to Pay offering as a way to connect requisitions, sourcing, compliance checks and settlement. Its central argument is that procurement technology should reduce follow-up work throughout the purchasing process, freeing buyers to negotiate and assess suppliers. The Maritime Executive identifies the piece as the author’s opinion rather than necessarily its own.