The cost and effort associated with implementing enabling technology can be significant and most companies expect quick results and no disruption to business operations.  Success hinges greatly on selecting the right solution provider. The ability to leverage the knowledge and experience of peers prior to making a decision can steer Shared Services leaders in the best direction for their organization and avoid the excess cost, effort, and service issues.

Recently, a Peeriosity member performed custom research using iPolling¹ functionality to ask peers with experience in Accounts Receivable Collections, “Which software do you use to manage collections from small and medium-sized customers?”

*Peeriosity members have access to the names of the vendors identified, as well as the satisfaction level members assigned to each vendor.

The follow-up question asked each respondent to identify the Company’s level of satisfaction associated with the software in use:

Respondents shared a significant number of comments providing additional insight into not only their responses but also prior experiences with applications used in the past. A few shared their perspectives on best practices to integrate billing and collections. Others shared their results/visions for end-to-end (Order through Cash) process optimization.

Some representative comments:

• We run SAP using FSCM for all customers, large and small. We have some customized reports that work very well for collection follow-ups and allow users to enter comments straight away on the screen. (Very Satisfied).

• We are currently using Oracle integrated with {Third-Party Software} as our AR collections system. Overall, it has been effective in prioritizing collection efforts. (Very Satisfied).

• We used to use {Previous Third-Party Software}, but an upgrade was necessary and we took the opportunity to look elsewhere for cost-effectiveness and functionality improvements. We chose {New Third-Party Software}. We are happy with the functionality, however, the only drawback is the lack of flexibility to make changes. Change requests are priced by the vendor on a case-by-case basis. With {Previous Third-Party Software} we had the ability to make changes in-house using our developers. Other than that, this is a good system and we manage over 10,000 small to medium active customers with statements, automated collection letters, notes, auto payments, etc. (Somewhat satisfied).

• We use SAP for managing the entire OTC process including customer collections. This is only the standard SAP functionality and reporting for AR, we are looking at the additional features of FSCM for implementation later this year or next. (Somewhat satisfied).

• We are transitioning to SAP FSCM from {Third Party Software} due to the increase in volume and data and information requirements.  The previous system required too much maintenance and modification to meet our growing data requirements that were already in SAP. FSCM looks like it will be excellent, but it’s not exactly where we need it to be just yet and the transition has been bumpy at times. (Neutral).

As with all Peeriosity custom research and iPolling, members have full visibility of respondent names by company, as well as the ability to contact them for follow-up discussion using Peer Mail, Peeriosity’s integrated email system.

How are you leveraging the experiences of your peers before selecting service or technology providers?

Who are your peers and how are you collaborating with them?

¹ “iPolling” is available exclusively to Peeriosity member company employees, with consultants or vendors prohibited from participating or accessing content.