The factors that help shape choice in the online payment world

There are now many payments types or channels available to both merchants and customers (cash, cheque, credit card, debit card, pre-paid card, direct debit, Internet direct bank transfer, e-wallet transfer etc). However, they all present different advantages and disadvantages, and these may be quite different for a consumer versus a merchant. However, by drawing together a range of international literature about payment systems and how they are used by people and organizations of all kinds, six attributes of payment products appear to be most relevant to the choices that are made of both merchants and their customers alike*. These six factors are:
capability

• cost
• convenience
• coverage
• confidence and
• confidentiality

Let’s look at each of these in a little more detail.
 
Capability

Capability refers to the functional ability to actually use a particular payment type or channel. For example, capability in cash transactions (the oldest and most ubiquitous of payment types) relates to a person or an organization being in a position to hand over a payment (having cash in an acceptable denomination/currency) and then receive the payment (also in an acceptable denomination/currency of course). This becomes a threshold issue in non-cash payments, which often involve technical issues such as the establishment of a means of communicating over distance, ability to verify the parties in a payment transaction, and many other factors.

Cost

All payment systems involve some costs (including cash). Both consumers and merchants are likely to seek to use lower cost payments if they can. This is especially the case if they can readily know what the use of each payment will cost them (sometimes this is transparent and sometimes it is not of course). The cost of a payment is not always spread evenly between the parties. Vendors of payment products will often seek to make some approaches appear to be no-cost or low-cost to the customer-but this may or may not be true. The cost structures of payment methods also differ; some have a fixed transaction charge while others are proportional to the size of the transaction.

Convenience

Convenience refers to the ease of use or “user-friendliness” of a payment method. A need for registration before using the payment method, or the speed of payment (for example, the time taken to approve a payment) can be factors affecting convenience. Consumers generally view cash as convenient to carry for small purchases at the point-of-sale. This means that to be competitive with cash, electronic payments systems have to offer a high level of convenience (hence all the current interest in mobile phone usage for payments). Businesses however typically have a very different perspective on convenience to that of consumers. They are likely to seek payment products and services that fit reasonably well into their broader processes and systems.

Coverage

Coverage refers to how widely a payment method or system is accepted by merchants and other recipients of payments, such as businesses receiving payments from suppliers. An important objective for all payment types and channels is therefore clearly to be widely accessible to merchants, traders, consumers and other users without high-entry or ongoing costs. Similarly, consumers should encounter as few barriers as possible in undertaking transactions using the chosen system.

Confidence

This refers to a customer’s belief that a payment will be successfully executed and completed, and that the value of a payment method will be respected. Confidence rises where arrangements are secure and value does not ‘leak’. The confidence that consumers have in a payment method also depends on the associated payment channel. For example, online payments with credit cards differ from offline payments, in that the card is not physically provided by the customer and the merchant does not obtain a signed confirmation from the customer. Some card schemes provide a system of cardholder authentication, usually through provision of name, credit card number and expiration date. To prevent illegitimate interception, this information is typically encrypted so as to increase levels of confidence in the payment system. 

Confidentiality

As a payment type only cash maintains payer and/or payee confidentiality. Non-cash payments often involve the collection of information that becomes valuable. Users of payment systems are often concerned about the collection and use of this often personal information, and its potential release to other parties, if not properly secured. For example, in general, credit card payments are made via an identifiable account, resulting in the loss of anonymity. This means that some individuals are uncomfortable or unhappy about using payment types or channels which cannot reasonably protect their personal information (and may increase the risk of theft or fraud).

Summary

Payment type or channel choices are complex for both a given consumer or merchant. However, in this article we have described six factors which seem to be most influential in the decision-making process. Although these factors all stand alone, they are not necessarily independent of one another of course. In other words, the boundaries between factors are often blurred of “fuzzy”.

In addition, it is also worth noting that any one of these factors can be primary, depending on a given individual or organizational perspective. For some consumers and/or merchants therefore, cost and convenience may be first and second (with other factors making little difference). However, for other consumers and/or merchants, capability, coverage and confidentiality may all have equal significance, for instance.

 

*The report by the Australian Government called “Exploration of future Electronic Payments” was extremely useful in assembling and describing the factors in more detail.

Developing a Payment Strategy-Step 3- Giving customers as user-friendly a billing and payment experience as possible.

In exploring what is involved in developing an overall payments strategy, in this article we will look at the third phase of five in total, which is giving customers as user-friendly a billing and payment experience as possible.

Most dictionaries suggest that user-friendliness involves making a customer process as easy to learn and operate as possible. In practical terms, this often boils down to making sure that language is straightforward and unambiguous. In a web site environment, this will mean making sure that screens are clean and uncluttered, and navigation is both speedy and efficient etc. However, when it comes to a relatively uninteresting task such as receiving and paying bills, it is suggested that the key to user-friendliness is clarity, convenience, choice and control. Let’s therefore look at each of these in a little more detail

Clarity
Many organisations confuse their customers by either failing to let them know clearly how payment can be made for products or services supplied, or bury the information in places where it cannot easily be found (or is difficult to understand when a customer does stumble across it). Customers need simple and clear language about where how they can receive a bill and where, when and how they can pay that bill. In a web site, “ways to pay” is often therefore a simple addition (as a page or a tab) especially when they can click a link and make a payment there and then.

Convenience
In general, convenience is something that increases comfort or saves work. When it comes to billing or payment therefore, the offered approach should allow greater comfort (being able to complete the whole task on line, at home, on a mobile etc) or less work (do it quicker, without having to rely on the physical mail, avoid paper-based copying/storage etc). This might also involve a more convenient web site experience (less clicks, more clickable options or deeper/better analysis when needed).

Choice
All customers like to have choices available (whether or not they use them). In bill presentment and payment, this typically means allowing customers to view their bill in flexible ways. In a web site, this might include the ability to view a mini bill or clickable bill detail. On the payment side, choice involves providing different payment mechanisms. We will look at this issue in more detail in step 4 of this series but in summary this should ideally include as many debit and credit side options as possible so that customers can settle a bill in a way that suits them (which they are more likely to do much more quickly when several choices are made available to them).

Control
According to recent research, customers will pay between 10 and 17 bills a month and may not feel that they are very much in control when these arrive at different times in the mail, are chased frequently and may specify few ways for payment to be made. Using online technology to both issue bills and allowed them to be paid flexibly is one way to overcome many of these frustrations and this has other advantages. In an online bill and payment environment, customers can store their bills electronically (and retrieve them when wanted) can calendarise payment to suit them, get immediate receipt of payment (giving the confidence and security that settlement has occurred) and can analyse bill data whenever and however they like. This all helps the customer feel that they are more in control.

In our next article in this series, we will look at the next phase in developing the Payment Strategy- making as much payment choice available as possible to customers.

What will happen to bank fees in the future?

In my last blog article I stated that Merchant Banks are now making a large proportion of their profits by charging fees to both end consumers or account holders (although they worry about overdoing this to prevent customer “churn”) and to merchants who want to offer payment services to their customers. In the latter, I also suggested, there are many direct and indirect fees in the mix that need to be closely scrutinised. In this follow-on article I want to look take a more philosophical perspective and gaze into the crystal ball a little. I am therefore going to look at what the future might hold for merchant bank fees of all kinds.

The future of Direct Customer fees
Banks tend to charge transactional fees only when a customer has gone beyond what is deemed to be the core commercial relationship. Hence, fees are typically charged to customers when they have overdrawn an account, written a cheque in circumstances where they are insufficient funds to cover it, written a banker’s draft, made a wire transfer or carried out a foreign exchange transaction etc.

Although different banks are likely to try different approaches, most of them will want to move to a more transparent business model with customers. This will involve no fees whatsoever for customers that maintain a minimum positive balance and are willing to tie inward payments to their checking account (such as regular salary payments for example). It may also be that the bank will require some other accounts to be maintained to keep fees at zero (such as having a separate savings account or buying insurance through the bank etc). However, the model here will typically be not to charge fees for normal everyday transactions, and this will include items such as electronic bill pay, peer-to-peer payments online or via a smart phone app and even account balance enquiries online or at an ATM.

Of course, while this free service approach may work well for customers who can maintain a minimum float in a checking account (and also meet the other standards that may be required), many customers will not be able to do this and may actually pay more than they are charged today. As this encompasses many customers who are potentially still very valuable to a bank in the long term, another strategy here (and one that has been adopted already in several banks) is to charge a single standard account management fee (such as £20 or £30 per month perhaps-often also involving some rewards or loyalty benefits being offered too). This would either render all transactional fees at zero (or at least all but the ones that involve a customer going into debt).

Merchant fees
There has been much controversy about merchant bank fees in recent years. This controversy arises mainly from two factors: The first is the scale of these fees (both fixed and variable). And the second is the number of different fees that are levied (leading to much complexity and frustration on the part of a given merchant, much of the time). As we saw in the last article, there are often many separate charges rendered by merchant banks including: Cash processing fees, Cheque processing fees, Discount Fee Rates, Inter-change Transaction Fees, Address Verification Service (AVS) fees, Batch Fees, Monthly Statement or Customer Service Fees, Monthly Minimum Fees, Gateway Fees, Annual Fees, Chargeback/Retrieval Fees, and even Cancellation/ Termination Fees (not to mention other administrative fees relating to copy statements or reminder letters etc). The shear volumes of these different and often layered fees make not only for extra hidden costs but often considerable internal merchant time and effort to check that they are accurately applied.

While it is highly unlikely that merchant side fees will disappear completely, we are already seeing a shift to fees that fall into two categories. Those fees that are seen by a merchant as relatively arbitrary and unrelated to any real cost or contribution (let’s call them bank overhead recovery fees) and fees that are seen by a merchant to relate directly to a particular service or tangibly valuable outcome (let’s call them convenience fees). The future of these two fee categories will be very different.

Overhead Recovery Fees
Overhead recovery fees (rightly or wrongly in reality) are seen to be things like Discount fee rates, Bank Interchange rates, Gateway Fees, Batch Fees, Monthly minimum fees, Annual fees, Cancellation/Termination fees and any fees related to administration (such as charging for an email being sent) etc. What these fees have in common is that most merchants see these costs as having no direct benefit to their business or add little value as far as they are concerned. In fact, most merchants take the view that many of these tasks and processes have been automated or made very simple and cheap in the advent of modern software and/or Internet based technology, and yet fees have remained broadly the same or in some cases gone up. Debit cards in the US, provide a particular example where fees which often average 75 cents or higher were known to be costing a bank 70-80% less than this.

All Merchant banks will continue to compete aggressively with one another to win new customers or to retain existing ones, and price will be their primary tool. This is likely to drive these perceived to be low valued-added overhead recovery fees down strikingly in the next few years. Furthermore, as more and more mainly internet-based payment providers come to the market (with far less overhead to have to recover of course) there is every chance that all of these fees will evaporate completely-very good news for merchants of all sizes and types.

Convenience fees
Convenience fees (again rightly or wrongly in reality) are seen to be things like Cash and Cheque processing fees, Monthly Statement fees, Chargeback/ Retrieval fees etc. Not only do most merchants appreciate that these services have more easily seen effort and cost associated with rendering them but can more readily appreciate the value that they add to them. In other words, these activities would be as costly or even more expensive if they were to be performed by the merchants themselves or some other third-party organisation. In addition, these activities are perceived to add value in many cases by providing efficiency, or even a direct customer service benefit (which either increases satisfaction or can justify a particular pricing position on goods and services). You’ll notice that Address verification fees or Customer Service fees are not automatically listed here as convenience fees. These qualify to be included but merchant banks need to work hard to explain why and how this is the case (whether it is describing the benefit of having a real live person available in a call-centre to help with an unusual transactional event or bring about better credit card security by using look-up database services etc).

For all of these fees, if well-presented and explained, there is every opportunity to continue to charge for the service offered. However, the real opportunity here (to both retain fee income and then to grow it) lies in really getting alongside merchants in helping them to reduce their costs or to increase their revenue (in tangible ways). In this respect the opportunity is to help the merchant get bills/invoices seen more quickly and in digital form, to set up calendarised and recurrent type payments when they want them, the offer aggregate bulk payments (especially in the B2B space), to offering currency exchange service options, to offer greater payment type ubiquity and to offer better analysis and reporting on progressive transactional activity. In addition to this, merchant banks can offer modern internet-based technology to store invoice and payment data, offer alerts and reminders when wanted and even to provide links to better goods and services pricing and payment options in the future. Simply put, fee income in this convenience category can grow, and do so substantially, but only when there is a true partnership and the bank and merchant can both gain from the relationship in real and visible ways.

Summary
The merchant bank fee scene will change dramatically in the next few years. Overhead recovery type fees will reduce dramatically and ultimately disappear altogether in the competitive landscape ahead. However, convenience type fees, or those that can be seen by a merchant to add-value will continue to exist and can grow. This growth however, will be heavily dependent upon each bank’s ability to work in partnership with their merchants and offer technology and services that tangibly lead to lower costs or higher revenues. This will therefore be the big challenge for merchant banks in the next few years.

Can Better Billing Practices Improve Merchant Cash-flow, Cost Effectiveness and Customer Satisfaction?

This blog article explores whether more efficient and effective billing practices deliver greater Cash-flow, Cost effectiveness and Customer Satisfaction for the merchant and more Convenience, Clarity/Certainty and Choice for the consumer-the 6 C’s

Billing is never the most exciting of subjects for business owners or managers, coming as it does as the last and perhaps most administrative or clerical step in the sales to delivery cycle. However, being a last step should not relegate it to being the least important and there is actually plenty of evidence to suggest that efficient billing practices may be one of the most critical. In this article we will therefore briefly explore why better billing practices can have a significant impact on cash-flow, cost-effectiveness and customer satisfaction for the merchant (as well as several equally beneficial, and linked, outcomes for their customers).

Before we look at each of these 3 merchant benefits in turn, let’s define what we mean by “efficient billing practices”. Presenting a bill or invoice can clearly be done in person (albeit rarely), in the physical mail (with a stamp), via an email (typically with a PDF attachment) or by digital means (via an Internet web site). All four of these options can be relatively “efficient” if they reach the right person quickly and facilitate the earliest possible settlement. However, experience (and much research) tells us that these practices are likely to be progressively more effective in the order in which they are listed. In other words, a full digital presentment of the bill is likely to be a much better option that delivering a bill by email, which in turn is better than doing so by physical mail etc. In this article we will therefore assume that a merchant will have, or aspire to have, the most efficient and effective approach –a full digital e-bill and it will be our contention that getting this bill delivered allows all the benefits we will elaborate upon subsequently to follow. The diagram below illustrates this rather more visually.

© PaySwyft, 2011. All Rights Reserved





Greater Cash-flow
The vast majority of organisations that supply a product or render a service to another organisation, or an end consumer, usually do so on credit terms (a lucky few get paid ahead of time of course). To operate somewhat like a lending bank, an organisation must therefore use shareholder funds, cash in its bank account, supplier credit (if they have any) or other money that is borrowed in some way (with interest being payable). These credit terms, or what is sometimes easier to visualise as the time taken to receive payment from customers, can have a huge impact on the working capital needed by a business and thereby have a critical affect on cash-flow. From the point of the delivery, spending days preparing and sending an invoice along with offering normal credit terms for a given industry (say 30 day terms on average), might mean that a particular enterprise may have an average days outstanding in practice of 40-45 days to get paid. Even for a relatively small business turning over say £500,000 a year this would mean working capital of £30,000 needs to be maintained just to stay in business (or in this case 6% of turnover).

Given the above, if a merchant takes its billing practices seriously, it should present an invoice to the customer in the fastest way possible (ideally digitally, the day after delivery-or even the same day perhaps). In addition, with a full digital bill, an opportunity can be offered to check that the bill has all the information that the customer needs to see and in as much detail and as they need to see it. This creates clarity and certainty that they are paying appropriately for what they have received. On a digitally presented bill, “clickable” payment options can allow the customer to render payment immediately (at the same web site and in the same session) or perhaps schedule a payment there and then (especially if there are multiple payment choices available, which we will look at later). All of this combines to ensure that invoice days outstanding are reduced, in some cases by up to 30-40%. This clearly has a very positive impact on cash-flow and allows working capital to be reduced or freed up for other uses (in the above small business example it could lead to 2-3% of total revenue in savings).

Greater Cost Effectiveness
It is estimated that physical bills (paper-base ones) still account for around 80% of the total volume of bills in all major economies, where there is good data to measure it such as the UK, Australia, Canada, France, Holland, Germany, New Zealand, Singapore, Sweden, and the US (amongst others).

The direct costs of preparing an invoice and sending it in the mail alone are relatively high, especially in an age when we can send almost any document electronically. However, they are even higher when you factor in the indirect costs associated with the potential for keying errors, mis-delivery and loss and the extra time often needed for accounting and reconciliation (to name but a few problems). The email based bill (now accounting for around 15% of the total volume of bills according to most research) removes some of the direct costs above, but almost none of the indirect costs of keying errors and mis-delivery, and extra time needed for accounting and reconciliation. The full digital bill is the only option therefore which has the scope to make a large dent in both direct and indirect costs.

With a well-designed system, a fully digital billing approach allows the customer to see the full bill immediately it is delivered (24/7 and 365 days a year) to analyse it versus other bills from the same merchant potentially and to immediately effect payment (or plan for it to occur on the system). This therefore affords much greater customer convenience (especially when they can use the system for their own personal bill storage and not have to wait for a merchant call-centre to be open to take a payment, for instance). However, the major benefits to the merchant are in having a full electronic record of each transaction (individually or in aggregate), with as much detail as they wish to see. And by maintaining the whole billing process in electronic form, all the data can flow in digital form in all directions, including reconciliation in the accounting system-thereby saving many labour hours and costs.

Greater Customer Satisfaction
When customers are asked about their overall experiences of organisational billing (in general) they will tend to mention three factors more than any other.

The first is that it should offer “clarity and certainty”. By this they typically mean that it should be a clear and easy to follow invoice, be accurate, be securely delivered to them and reflect what they have purchased in a certain way.

Secondly, they will typically say that a bill should be “conveniently” presented. Mailing it may meet this need (physically or by email) but digitally allows it to be viewed at any time day and night and, if it is user-friendly enough, can allow for further detail to be scrutinised, when desired.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, customers will nominate the need for “choice” to be available to them. On the presentment side this may be whether to pay the bill now or later or to set up a scheduled or recurrent payment (with associated electronic alerts and reminders to an email account of mobile phone, as needed). On the payment side, this may be to have lots of immediate and widespread payment types or options to be used on both the debit and credit side if possible. In a well-designed digital billing web site, all of this can be available with an even greater range of choices being available in terms of individual customer preferences, in many cases.

Summary
In conclusion then it should by now be clear that the apparently basic and administrative item of a simple bill to a customer can be presented in a way that can have a significant bearing on Cash-flow, Cost Control and Customer Satisfaction. A well-designed and fully electronic or digital billing process will typically give the best results and all organisations should therefore consider moving to such a system as quickly as possible, especially if they can add it as an additional channel to existing practices (minimising disruption) and on a pay-as-you-go basis (as offered by systems such as PaySwyft for example).