Financial Automation Roadmap for 2026

Practical questions and answers about AI, people, and processes

Financial automation is no longer an isolated project—it has become a structural capability for companies.

In 2026, the difference between finance teams that scale with control and those that stall will not be just the technology they choose, but how financial processes, people, data, and AI are organized over time.

This content brings together and deepens the main questions raised during the class
“From Planning to Practice: Automation and AI in Finance in 2026”, presented with the goal of helping finance teams move beyond theory and structure a realistic automation and AI roadmap for 2026.

The questions below reflect real doubts from people trying to move from planning to practice and implement financial process automation with responsibility, governance, and tangible impact.

Considering the importance of this new skill set in AI and automation, how can we be better prepared for this new reality? And where can we find qualified people to hire?

The profile most likely to stand out in finance is the hybrid professional—someone who combines financial knowledge with logic, data, and technology.

Whenever possible, the best path is to develop this profile internally. Professionals who already know the business understand context, risk, and impact, and they evolve much faster when they move away from excessive manual tasks and start working on processes and financial automation.

When this isn’t possible, it’s worth looking for people who already combine finance + technology. There’s no need for an “AI specialist,” but rather someone curious, structured in their thinking, and able to learn quickly.

Practical communities, such as Finance 5.0, are often good starting points to find this type of profile.

Where can I learn more about AI in the context of financial automation? Is there more beyond prompting?

Prompting is important, but it’s only the surface.

As discussed in the class, learning AI applied to financial process automation requires understanding problems, processes, and context, not just writing commands.

In practice, this includes:

• Knowing when to use AI and when not to use it
• Separating deterministic problems from interpretive ones
• Working with data, validation, fallbacks, and human supervision
• Integrating AI into real financial workflows, rather than using it in isolation

Applied AI is process + data + logic + governance. Prompting is just a small part of that.

For those who want to go deeper, additional content and classes on financial automation with AI are available at this link.

Do you have any templates to map opportunities for financial process automation?

Yes. We recommend using two complementary resources:

1. Inspiration and opportunity discovery

A spreadsheet with 100+ real examples of financial back-office automations, indicating complexity level, estimated implementation time, and tools involved.

👉 https://www.abstra.io/pt/recursos/automacao-financeira/materiais/planilha-100-exemplos

2. Prioritization with clear criteria

After listing opportunities, the next step is prioritization. For that, we use an automation prioritization matrix, crossing impact, effort, and risk.

👉 https://www.abstra.io/pt/recursos/automacao-financeira/materiais/matriz-priorizacao

Automation without prioritization becomes an endless backlog.
Automation with criteria becomes a financial automation roadmap.

How should we handle high-impact, high-risk financial processes?

Critical processes should not be fully automated autonomously right away.

The safest approach, reinforced during the class, is to break the process into parts:

• Deterministic parts → direct automation
• Interpretive or variable parts → AI with supervision
• Critical decisions → remain human

In practice, financial automation is used to reduce effort, errors, and rework, while maintaining clear points of validation, approval, and auditability.

Starting small, in controlled scopes, helps measure trust and impact before increasing the level of autonomy.

Responsible automation does not eliminate risk—it makes risk visible, traceable, and manageable.

Does Abstra offer AI agents for financial automation? How can I test them?

Yes. Abstra allows you to build financial automation flows with AI and agents, combining interpretation with rules, validations, Python, and integrations with existing systems.

Some common examples discussed in the class include:

• Document reading and extraction (OCR + AI)
• Automatic classification of expenses and revenue
• Intelligent reconciliations focused on exceptions
• Recurring analyses to support human decision-making

Agents do not operate without limits. You can define clear levels of human supervision, rules, and autonomy depending on the risk of the process.

Tests usually start with simple, real cases, precisely to validate control and impact before moving on to more critical workflows.

In the Python Applied to Finance class, we offer a 7-day trial for hands-on testing:
👉 https://www.abstra.io/pt/recursos/automacao-financeira/aula-python-aplicado-ao-financeiro-11112025-catarina-pinheiro

Does financial automation depend on IT? How do you deal with projects that get stuck in technical approval?

This is a common pain point in financial automation and financial process automation projects.

What usually unlocks progress is not “bypassing” IT, but reducing friction without sacrificing security and governance.

In practice, a few approaches help a lot:

• using tools that reduce day-to-day dependency on IT, while maintaining clear standards for security, control, and auditing
• choosing vendors that have already passed cybersecurity reviews, avoiding rework and long approval cycles
• starting automation projects independently from IT, but not ignoring them, bringing the technical team into the conversation as value becomes clear

As discussed in the class, opportunity mapping is decisive. Prioritize automations that:

• deliver quick impact
• present controlled risk
• solve real operational pain points

When a project shows results and governance from the start, it stops being seen as shadow IT and is recognized as a structural improvement to the financial operation.

How do you split time between operations and financial automation? And how do you justify this investment to managers?

Time for automating financial processes doesn’t appear on its own—it needs to be created.

Some practices help make automation feasible even in overloaded routines:

• reserving small, recurring blocks of time for automation
• prioritizing automations with high impact and low effort
• measuring impact in predictability, risk, and stability, not just hours saved

Managers tend to recognize value when they see less delay, less rework, and more control in financial processes. Structuring and communicating this impact accelerates acceptance of financial automation as an investment rather than a cost.

How can automation make finance teams more strategic? Training or hiring—which works better?

Neither training alone nor hiring alone solves the problem.

What truly raises the strategic level of a finance team is the work system built by leadership, especially in contexts of financial process automation.

Teams begin to think more strategically when:

• there is a safe space to test, fail, and learn, without punishment for trying
• the team is trained to plan and prioritize with explicit criteria, focusing on impact, risk, and effort
• decisions are guided by value generated, not just urgency
• real problems are part of the routine—not just execution
• recognition values decision quality, not just task volume

Training is essential—but training people to think, prioritize, and decide, not just execute processes.

Hiring helps, of course—but without this environment, even strong professionals end up stuck in operational mode.

Does financial automation generate ROI? Are there proven cases and business cases?

Yes. And in practice, the most convincing ROI from financial automation goes far beyond hours saved.

What usually convinces managers is the operational before-and-after, with clear gains such as:

• reduced operational risk
• more predictable financial close
• less dependency on key individuals
• the ability to scale without proportional headcount growth

A concrete example is the case of Onfly.

Before automation, supplier reconciliation took 1 to 1.5 weeks.
After the automation built with Abstra, the process runs in about 20 minutes, with fewer than 2% human exceptions.

More than speed, the main gain was operational reliability and peace of mind.

“The biggest value is the peace of mind of knowing the process is automated and won’t be delayed—the number I see is the real one.”
— Marcus Nunes, Head of Sourcing at Onfly

In addition, the automation avoided hiring approximately four additional people, allowing the financial operation to scale without proportional team growth.

Other examples are available in our financial automation case studies.

Financial automation in FP&A: Is it possible to sync data without using Airflow?

Yes. Financial process automation also covers FP&A.

Tools like Airflow are powerful, but often excessive for tactical finance needs and require heavy dependence on data engineering teams.

In practice, financial automation in FP&A has been used to:

• sync data across systems (ERP, banks, CRMs, spreadsheets, and BI tools)
• apply financial rules and validations
• maintain traceability, logs, and auditability
• structure data for analysis, forecasting, and alerts
• reduce rework and reliance on manual scripts

A practical example is the case of Jusbrasil, which uses automation to structure and synchronize financial data more reliably.

Financial automation and tax reform: How much time do I have to adapt my processes?

Even though the transition period may seem long, the operational impacts of tax reform start earlier.

As early as January 1, 2026, tax systems will require new layouts, fields, and rules. This means that classification, integration, and reconciliation processes must be tested before that date.

For more sensitive changes—such as tax credits, calculation, and reconciliation—preparation needs to begin in 2026, even if some rules only take effect in 2027.

The biggest risk is not the legal deadline, but realizing too late that your provider isn’t ready.

That’s why it’s essential to:

• map critical financial processes early
• challenge vendors on their roadmap, timelines, and limitations
• build your own automation layers to reduce dependency

Conclusion

The questions answered in this article reveal a clear pattern:
the challenge of financial automation in 2026 is not technological—it’s structural.

The roadmap starts with:

• clear processes
• proper prioritization
• governance from day one

Well-executed financial process automation doesn’t replace people—it creates space for finance teams to operate in a more strategic, predictable, and sustainable way.

If the challenge now is to move from planning to practice, the full class dives deeper into the criteria, real examples, and decisions discussed here.

👉 Watch the full recording (available in Portuguese only):
https://www.abstra.io/pt/recursos/automacao-financeira/workshop-planejamento-pratica-automacao-ia-financeiro-2026-11122025-catarina-pinheiro

---