.svg)
An outsourced accounting firm evaluating a new AP platform tends to focus on capability first: what can it read, what can it code, what can it sync. The question that predicts whether a switch works is different. It's what the team has to do to get it running, across every client at once, without any one of those clients noticing a thing changed.
For a firm managing AP across a dozen client entities, each with its own approval structure and its own accounting file, the underlying problem is a multi-entity one, whether the client roster is a dozen separate businesses or one company's dozen subsidiaries. That answer determines whether the switch happens at all. Most platforms answer it badly. Onboarding means rebuilding approval logic client by client, migrating records, or asking every client to change how they already work. For a firm whose entire value proposition is operating like an extension of the client's own team, a disruptive setup process undercuts the pitch before the platform has done anything useful.
The first week looks different when the platform is built around this problem from the start. This guide covers what changes, what doesn't, and where a firm's team spends its time during that first week.
Where a multi-client setup earns or loses trust
A new platform means rebuilding every client's approval process from scratch. Each client's rules exist somewhere, usually in someone's head or an outdated document, and re-creating them inside a new system takes real hours per client before a single bill gets processed.
Migration means touching the accounting connection. A firm running QuickBooks for a dozen clients doesn't want to migrate a single one of them just to adopt a new AP layer. A platform that requires that trade is asking a firm to accept real risk to a client relationship for a process improvement the client never asked for.
Volume caps the roster. A team processing bills manually across many clients hits a ceiling on how many clients it can service well, long before it hits a ceiling on how many clients it could otherwise win. A firm that could take on three more clients this quarter often doesn't, not because the demand isn't there, but because the AP team is already at capacity just keeping up with the roster it has.
Vendor experience compounds across every client at once. A payment that runs a day or two slow for one company is a minor annoyance. The same delay repeated across a dozen client relationships, each with its own vendors watching how reliably they get paid, becomes a pattern that reflects on the firm managing all of them, not just on any single client.
What a multi client setup requires
Approval rules defined once per client and applied without rebuilding logic for every new client added
No migration off the accounting system already in place, since the client relationship depends on that system staying untouched
Coding and routing that stays specific to each client instead of forcing one shape across all of them
Visibility that lets a small team manage volume across many entities without adding headcount per client
A setup process built per client, not rebuilt from scratch for each one, since every hour spent reconfiguring is an hour not spent on client work.
A platform built for a single company's AP treats another client as a configuration problem to solve from scratch. A platform built for outsourced accounting treats it as the normal, repeatable unit of work.
What a real first week looks like
The existing accounting connections stay exactly as they are; nothing about a client's QuickBooks file changes when their AP moves onto MakersHub. Each client's approval rules get defined once, matching how that client already operates, not a generic template applied across all of them. Once that's done, bills flow, coded and routed correctly, per client, with no client-facing disruption, because nothing about how a client interacts with their own books has changed on their end.
Client by client: how it runs
Connect. Each client's existing accounting system connects without migration.
Define. Each client's actual approval chain gets built once: who signs off at what dollar threshold, whether a bill needs one approver or two, and which of that client's own team members that authority belongs to. The structure matches how the client already runs approvals, not a template imposed on top of it, and it doesn't get rebuilt the next time a bill comes in.
Process. Bills route, code, and pay per client's own rules, from one login covering the full client roster.
What multi-entity AP looks like at ten clients instead of one
Paseo Advisors, an outsourced finance firm built around what its founders, Nelson Curtis and Jake Kendell, call an 'office doppelgänger' model, integrating directly into each client's workflow rather than operating as an outside vendor, moved its full client roster, spanning SaaS, professional services, and home services businesses, onto MakersHub without migrating a single client off QuickBooks. Read the full story.
The firms that scale their client base without scaling headcount aren't doing it by working harder inside the old process. They're doing it with a setup that doesn't ask them to rebuild anything just to add the next client, and a first week that a client never has reason to notice happened.