Credit Management

This year, Experian business information services released some major enhancements to our BusinessIQ product. The project was completed by a highly skilled team here at Experian and heavily driven by customer feedback. Today we'll speak with Casey Hald. one of our lead software developers as he takes us through some of the enhancements to BusinessIQ. The transcription of our interview with Casey has been lightly edited to improve readability. What was the main goal of this redesign on BusinessIQ? CH: The goal of the redesign project was to not only improve BIQ user experience and design but also update the overall framework as well.  We wanted to bring BIQ into 2020 strong and  I feel like we did that. Maybe you could talk a little bit about how that process worked in this case. CH: So first I dug up the existing research material when BIQ was first being developed and used that as sort of a baseline for what BusinessIQ is all about. Since coming into Experian, I was brand new to the credit space. So having that research material was very important to me to have empathy for our users. So,  I was lucky that in the first month of joining the team I traveling across the U.S. visiting our biggest clients,  well both big and small and mom and pop companies and basically discovering why they use BIQ and you know, why it was important to them. So, they sent you out on the road to meet face to face. It wasn't just a conference calls? CH: Yeah, face to face. So we went from the West Coast to the Midwest, to the East coast and we visited companies, big and small. It was a treat. It was over 27 different participants across 16 different companies. So we got to talk to a lot of people. What were their struggles with BusinessIQ? CH: Yeah, so they love BusinessIQ for the speed and accuracy of pulling credit reports.  They choose us over our competitors because of that speed. So we wanted to make sure that with this redesign that wasn't compromised at all. And that was something that they love with the existing design. However, with the existing design, unless you are already privy to how BusinessIQ is structured, a new credit analyst coming into this pace could be somewhat confused. So we used that as sort of a baseline to decide how we wanted the redesign to go. CH: So the first thing we did was we simplified the forgot password workflow. A lot of the challenges that our customers ran into was updating their credentials, managing their credentials. With BusinessIQ, it's security first. So we require that they log in. They can't just log in and walk away, the system will just be open for people to compromise security. It refreshes every 15, 20 minutes, so sometimes they forget to log in. So we wanted to simplify that workflow by adding a remember me functionality. So that way they can plug in their credentials and can log in. We also modified the look and feel and the design to a more modern look and feel. And so that would involve what the site navigation? CH: Yeah, the sign navigation. With that we updated the layout, moving it to the side to more of a modern dashboard, which you see a lot of times with modern applications. They have navigation right here and then the content takes up the majority of the space, which is something that we wanted.  We removed search from the navigation since,  it's now in the header searches, the meat, and potatoes of BusinessIQ. What our customers use and love is search. So we wanted to take that out of the body, and give that its own container and put that right above the navigation. So it's something that becomes the focal point of the application. We also reordered the search elements based on the order of importance based on customer feedback. So it's not just alphanumeric. We reordered it based on the importance of what we learned from our users. What about pulling reports? Because I mean, our customers love to pull reports and they pull a lot of them, right? CH: Absolutely. So, when they pull the reports, it's arguably the most important workflow to BusinessIQ. They use BusinessIQ to view a credit report. So if a customer wanted to pull a new report in the old design, they would need to first search a company, view an old report, click on pull report, and then view the report configuration options, which aren't exactly super organized, and then click to view the report. So with the new design, the user searches a company views the company information alongside the report configuration options and then clicks on the report. So we've lessened the number of clicks by one or two and organized it to a step by step process. So a new credit analyst coming into space doesn't get confused about what configurations he or she needs to make. The old design requires potentially 26 form inputs while the new design contains only six. Our goal made pulling a report easier by making the configuration options into a series of steps,  as opposed to just a random configuration. What are the other big improvements? Did you do anything in credit configuration? CH: Yeah. So 85% of our users stated that they never changed the report type because they simply didn't understand what each report type contained. They didn't understand the benefits of a Premiere Profile versus a business report. So we added a summary for each report type. So any new credit analysts that come in, they can simply read the summary and understand what each report type means to them, and why they need to pull it. Since users often pull the same report, we added a separate card for past pulled reports. So it uses a one-two, three-step approach, making it super easy for a new user to use. And there's only one call out with all the options already default selected. So there are a lot fewer form inputs. So this has got to be saving our customers a ton of time. Right? It's all about productivity and making your business more efficient. Is that really how those improvements have been received? CH: Totally, and a lot of our credit analysts, when they use BusinessIQ, they're in and out in five minutes. They go in, search a company, pull a report, log out, get on with the rest of their workday. So we wanted to keep that, you know, save their time because time is the most important asset you have right? So we wanted to make sure that that was first and foremost. What about the management of reports if they're pulling a lot of reports, is the management of that been fixed or improved? CH: Absolutely. So we added a quick search filter to find exactly the report you're looking for. For a new credit analyst, we rolled up all the filters into a simple selector delimited by date.  So they always see the freshest report at the top, which is super important.  The user now has control over how many reports that they can view at once with our new paginated system,  which is utilizing Google materials design documentation. So we took kind of what they learned,  through their research and utilize that into our cards and components as well.  The business name is now the focal point instead of the date, which is super important. And we removed the reference code as it wasn't being used among users. It was a big sequence of numbers that kind of got in the way. And one of the goals of our redesign is to cut away the things that our users don't use and create focal points for the things that were most important to them.  So that's how we improved managing reports. What has the response from our clients been? CH:  luckily for me and my job, they love it.  they love the new visual direction. They say that it's pretty, which is a compliment. But they also say that it is much easier for them to use.  One of the things that we improved,  in terms of cutting things away was that the old dashboard contained 10 to 15 different cards with newsreels tasks, some charts,  portfolio charts, things that our customers didn't necessarily use first and foremost on the dashboard. They kind of just went straight to search. And when I asked them if you had a Wishlist on what you would like to see on the dashboard, what would it be? And the first thing that they said was recent reports. If you could put recent reports at the top, so that way I can always see the last report that I pulled. So I don't make a mistake of pulling that same report. That would be lovely. So,  that was one of the major things that we did. And we're seeing a lot of positive feedback,  from just that simple improvement alone,  let alone the other improvements that we've made. So,  the reports have been positive and we're continuing to keep our ears open.  We have a lot of empathy for our users and the way that they use BusinessIQ.  So we're going to continue to listen to them and, and continue to iterate on the design since the design is a very fluid solution, right? Design changes over time. So we're keeping that first and foremost for our users. What was your biggest learning? CH:  So the thing that I learned the most was how quickly our customers use the application. They go in, they search, find what they're looking for, they use it as a confirmation of address and phone number. For our credit analysts, the phone number is super important alongside address information when they're pulling a credit report. Since a lot of companies have ambiguous locations that could look like one another. So I learned that differentiating those elements was super important to them. It actually sped up their workflow. So we use that in conjunction with some of the other design decisions that we made to improve the overall user experience. So for me, being in the credit space and having the opportunity to redesign the experience I really learned from our users, that has been a privilege.

During the great recession of 2008, the recovery of the U.S. economy hinged on the idea that certain institutions were just too big to fail. Bailouts ensued and the recovery effort was long and arduous. Today, the COVID-19 pandemic poses a different kind of threat to the U.S. economy, grinding the wheels of commerce to a crawl, forcing millions of businesses to temporarily close and lay off workers. The Federal Government passed the CARES act, including the $349 billion Paycheck Protection Program. These bold relief efforts, while helpful to many, came too late as a flood of businesses sought bankruptcy protection through the courts.  With only a few states planning to loosen social distancing and safe at home restrictions, the courts are being forced to improvise. So in this post, we spoke to an attorney, Scott Blakely about a couple of unique cases involving iconic American retail brands. The first Tent Sale   Over 60 years ago, Michigan entrepreneur Art Van Elsander opened the first of seven Art Van furniture outlets. By the time they opened their seventh store, cash flow was an issue. On the brink of bankruptcy they came up with a novel idea — erecting a huge tent in the parking lots of the stores to attract crowds of shoppers, and drive-up cash flow, hatching the first-ever “Tent Sale.”  Art Van Furniture ran tv ads all the time and were a major sponsor of America’s Thanksgiving Parade.  In the 1990s when the parade organizers ran into financial difficulty Art Van Elsander wrote a $250,000 personal check so that the parade could go on. Art Van Elsander passed away in 2018. Fast forward to early March 2020, Art Van Furniture had grown to become a $1.4 billion retail juggernaut with 141 stores and 3,700 employees. By March 8th, battered by tariffs on Chinese furniture imports, Art Van Furniture filed for Chapter 11.  Under Chapter 11 bankruptcy, debtors are left in control of the business and provided an injunction that prevents creditors from collecting debts or recovering collateral.  Three days after filing, the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus to be a pandemic, and on March 13th the Trump administration declared a national emergency, forcing non-essential businesses to close. 🚨 BREAKING 🚨 "We have therefore made the assessment that #COVID19 can be characterized as a pandemic"-@DrTedros #coronavirus pic.twitter.com/JqdsM2051A — World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) March 11, 2020 The two announcements crippled Art Van’s ability to conduct a tent sale so they filed a request of the court to convert their case from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7. Under Chapter 7, the management of the company loses control and a trustee is appointed by the court. Under Chapter 7 the chances of debt recovery are greatly reduced. In Art Van Furniture’s case, remaining shut down during the COVID-19 pandemic would result in expenses eclipsing any potential revenues generated for creditors. Their hand was forced, and the courts took action. We asked our legal expert Scott Blakeley to give us his take and here’s what he said: “In Art Van’s case, the pandemic destroyed a strategy to operate to prepare for the sale of all its assets as a going concern to Levin Furniture’s former owner, so as to capture that value to distribute to unsecured creditors.  Art Van’s alternate strategy to pause the Chapter 11 proceedings until the pandemic passed was not workable as it could not meet the accruing administrative expenses.  Rather, Art Van was forced to implement a going out of business strategy for all of its stores.  In the initial days of the store closing sales, deposits from inventory sales dropped from $23 million to just $8 million in their final week." "Continued negotiations with creditors to pause Chapter 11 proceedings and conserve cash to meet fee obligations and pay former employees also fell through. In the middle of proceedings, the Judge ordered Art Van to freeze any spending in order to have the company declare amounts owed to employees. By then, however, employees joined in suing the retailer. With no revenue coming in and no amounts to cover employee pay and health care, the Judge declared that Art Van could not choose to pay employees at the expense of other creditors without a court order. With no other options, Art Van filed their request to convert the case to a Chapter 7, handing over the decision to the Trustee and Bankruptcy Court. In Art Van’s case, the Trustee is hoping to open stores again, but that pathway is unclear given the stay-at-home orders of states.  Unsecured creditors are not expected to receive a distribution.” Landlords cry foul over Modell’s bankruptcy pause Morris A. Modell opened the first Modell’s Sporting Goods on Cortland Street in Lower Manhattan in 1889. On March 11th, 2020 that run ended when they filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, announcing they would be closing all 134 stores, citing declining interest in sporting apparel. They had planned an orderly liquidation to proceed through the month of April and sell a portion of their stores. But the Government imposed closure of non-essential businesses hampered those efforts so on March 23rd Modell’s requested and were granted a period of suspense in their bankruptcy case until April 30th, citing a rarely used Section 305 provision. Ordinarily, rent must be paid to the landlord post-bankruptcy, with the exception of a limited grace period for cause, and COVID-19 would be such a case.  So landlords in this case got the short end of the stick, they cannot collect rent or evict. Scott Blakeley offers the following assessment of what happened with Modell’s: “With its chapter 11 filing, Modell’s was forced to liquidate its assets through going–out–of–business (GOB) sales at its retail locations.  However, COVID-19 restrictions shuttered the GOB sales. Modell’s motioned the bankruptcy court to suspend the GOB sales given the COVID crisis and the resulting stay-at-home orders.  The court order allowed Modell’s to suspend payments to landlords for post-petition rent since the retailer could not conduct their GOB sales at the stores.  Other retailers in chapter 11 are likely to follow Modell’s strategy to suspend post-petition payments to landlords as social isolation orders continue. Given Covid-19 and stay at home orders, debtors and even creditors may benefit at some level (other than landlords) from the suspension of chapter 11 as debtors can preserve the value of their business as it stays in place, lenders can preserve the value of their collateral by not being forced to seek a premature sale or liquidation, and unsecured creditors may increase the likelihood of a distribution through enhanced values of GOB sales.  The chapter 11 case suspension is expected to extend through May 30th, but landlords are expected to oppose.” Scott Blakeley is the founder of Blakeley, LLP, a noted expert in the field of creditors’ rights, commercial law, e-commerce, and bankruptcy law. Scott regularly speaks to industry groups around the country and via monthly webcasts on the topics of creditors' rights and bankruptcy.  

We recently sat down with Kyle Blanchard, Product Manager with Business Information Services to ask him a few questions about Experian's improved OneSearch technology. What is OneSearch? OneSearch is a lot of things at its core. OneSearch is the ability for a customer to find a business, but the story of OneSearch is much bigger than that. OneSearch is Experian's technological advancement and journey on how we're bringing all of our innovations to drive improvements for our customers. So, our customers can find businesses today, but at Experian we had to ask the question, how can we make this better? And with OneSearch, we're providing the ability for our customers to find businesses faster, and for them to find a more exact match and a more precise business every single time. What should Experian clients expect? Our clients can expect a variety of changes. Those changes won't come in terms of the products or services you're using today, but more about the experience you're having. So whether you're using BusinessIQ, or you're getting files in batch, the only experience difference you're going to feel is you're going to get better match results, more match results, and you're going to get them at a faster speed. So your experience is going to improve. This is going to be free of charge. This is just an internal improvement that we're making for you. But, every way you interface with our applications or your services will not change at all. Why does OneSearch matter to our clients? This matters a lot to our clients. Their first experience and every experience they have with us starts with finding the right business. So, we stepped back and we asked ourselves, how can we improve this experience for our customers and how can we make it better? And so, we looked at all technologies available and we did an evaluation, and what we had was a deterministic solution but where we really needed to be was a probabilistic one. But the investment that the company or that we needed to make to get there is significant. But we saw that this is an important investment to make because of the improvements that it can drive for our customers, and the improvements it could drive for our customers are wide and varied. Whether it be an improved ROI because you're finding more businesses, or a faster processing time so you can do more jobs even quicker. Why is Experian investing in innovation and technology? Experian is investing in innovation and technology for two reasons. One, it's part of our culture, we're always investing in innovation and technology, whether it be this probabilistic search match algorithm, whether it be machine learning or whether it be A.I. We're always trying to innovate and always trying to drive new best practices in technology. Finally, we know the importance from our customer perspective. This is fundamental to their experience. And not only that, we recently partnered with Forrester to do a research study and found that over 85% of risk managers are looking to improve their risk management practices. 75% of those are willing to invest and purchase a solution within the next year. So we know how important this is to our customers, and the only way to get there is to innovate and always drive new technology. Learn More About OneSearch

This weeks guest post is by Katie Keitch, VP of Commercial Services at InsideARM. InsideARM is a media company who specializes in training for credit management professionals. To receive future articles, sign up to the InsideARM newsletter. Katie Keich, V.P. Commercial Services InsideARM It's 2019, we have IVR systems that sound like you are talking to a human. We have AI technology that can analyze and form collections treatment. We can process payment via SMS messaging. Is it silly to think that the "right" letter strategy could possibly outperform a live collector? A letter series is delivered most commonly today using e-mail and/or through the customer's account portal. Let's dig in. In my travels and conversations, a very succinct theme is the question, "Who collected the money? Did my collector's efforts bring in the cash? Or was it something else?" Often businesses can't be 100% sure if it was a collector's efforts that brought the money in or not. Did the customer just pay the bill on their own because they suddenly could afford to? How much of the money was recovered by no one making a call? Could a letter strategy replace a collector, or should it enhance the collector's efforts? These questions are normal things to consider. As a credit and collections leader, I think it's always important to give your collectors the ability to utilize as many resources and tools to enhance their efforts. Step One: Is your current letter strategy set up to aid the collector's efforts or compete with the collector? Are you using the letter strategy in tandem with a collector's dials or instead of their dials? You must decide if a letter series is going to replace the collector's efforts or if it is going to be assisting there collection efforts. Quick Exercise: If you'd like to put your collectors' efforts to the test, discontinue the use of customer touches via letter strategy. Create an escalated letter series that runs without a collector making a phone call. I would measure it for 60, 90, and 120 days and measure the collector's recovery rate. Is the collector performing at lower, higher or the same rate of recovery? How did the customers that never got phone calls and only got the letter series perform? How much cash came in without a collector calling? Step Two: Is your current letter strategy saying the same thing each time or does it have escalated intent in the verbiage? If you want to make the most of your letter series, they should look and sound different. Letter 1- Should be sent about a week before the invoice is due and include a copy of the invoice. This way, if they lost or didn't receive, the invoice for the first time, you are automatically re-sending. Letter 2- Should be sent a week after the invoice is due, notifying the customer you haven't received payment. If they want to avoid late fees, maximize discounts with you, etc. they should process payment immediately online. If you are sending this via email or pop-up message on their portal, the link should be included to process payment. Automatically offer the customer the discounted rate if they process payment before end of business day. If you don't have a payment portal, honor the discounted pricing with payment process via phone that day. Letter 3- Should be sent approximately 10 business days after letter 2 if payment still hasn't been received. You should be mentioning possible service interruption, loss of discounts and/or late fees if unresolved. You want it to be clear that the account is in jeopardy of service interruption if not resolved within 5 business days. Step Three: Does your letter strategy have dates and accountability? You want to ensure that urgency can be read in the tone and verbiage chosen. It shouldn't be open ended, and it should always offer the customer the ability to resolve the delinquency. If they haven't filed an invoice dispute with you by now, that's a problem. If you don't receive the payment be prepared to temporarily disrupt service. Letter 4- Should be sent approximately 5 business days after letter 3 if payment hasn't been received. You should include a date for service interruption, loss of discounts and/or late fees, and mention reporting the delinquency to the credit bureaus. Quick tip: If you want the customer to make you a priority than you should be reporting your delinquent customers monthly. You can set up to automatically send an aging report to the credit report providers. This is a great tool to help the customer in making you a priority for payment. Step Four: Does your letter series clearly communicate the penalties if payment is delinquent after service interruption? Does the customer understand if you have to send them to a third-party collection agency that they will incur additional costs? Letter 5- Should be sent 5 business days after letter 4. It should include an incentive to pay you immediately. However, it should clearly state if payment isn't received the incurred actions taken and fees associated. This should be your final demand for payment. My recommendation is for the letter strategy to be used in addition to collector calls. If you want to maximize the efforts of your collectors than you should use a dual strategy. Many organizations use a dual strategy today but don't sleep on the fact that you could have a very effective letter series, if developed and executed properly. Business Chat | LIVE Watch the interview we did with Katie Keich of InsideARM on best practices in planning your first collections call with your delinquent customer.

This weeks guest post is by Katie Keitch, VP of Commercial Services at InsideARM. InsideARM is a media company that specializes in training for credit management professionals. To receive future articles sign up to the InsideARM newsletter. Oftentimes organizations miss out on higher bad debt recoveries. The number one reason this happens is that they hold on to the debt for too long. It’s important in the onboarding process to start with the end in mind: setting yourself up for success by having mutually agreed payment terms, billing cycle, right party contact information, etc. However, even if you have done that all correctly from the start, some customers, unfortunately, aren’t able to pay for one reason or another. Here’s how to know when to cut bait and enlist the help of a 3rd party collections agency. Don’t ignore the warning signs Your customer isn’t paying within the agreed payment terms. Or maybe they were paying on time, but lately they have been pushing farther and farther out. Your customer is showing past due more often and/or farther past due than historically Your customer hasn’t paid you in the last 45+ days Your customer is 60+ day’s past due to their mutually agreed payment terms Your customer made broken promises to pay Your customer stopped taking your phone calls Your customer’s emails are suddenly not going through or the physical mailing address is returning mail to sender Be proactive in your communication Don’t be afraid to ask how things are going, especially if you noticed they are outside their normal payment cycle. Immediately offer alternative options instead of having to pay you the full past-due amount today. Set the expectation that it’s vitally important that they keep the communication lines open. If they have something come up, they need to call you. And always answer your calls. You have to be blunt and purposeful in your approach here so that they understand the commitment to you. Offer some alternative options  While it’s so important that your customer takes your calls, it’s equally important to give them attainable goals. If they feel that they have options, they are more likely to keep the lines of communication open. Alternative options might include things like offering the ability to make a small weekly payment towards the balance. Offer your customer the ability to continue doing business with you while making payments. The best way to accomplish this is to set the expectation they must remain current on the new invoices. Make the weekly payments smaller so they are able to keep to the commitment. Your customer can always call you and make additional payments. However, it's important that they stick to their original commitment. Ask your customer what is the dollar amount they can afford to pay weekly (hopefully automatically)? If the dollar amount is less than their normal spend, this is a sign that they can’t stay active as a customer. Give them the option to use alternative vendors until they can cover their average invoices plus the delinquent amount. Your stakeholders in Sales may not be immediately supportive. but they will thank you in the long run. Especially if they have chargebacks or are commissioned on collected revenue. Last, in my experience, customers appreciate that you recognize and don’t want to see them get to a place of debt they can't repay. The snowball effect of continuing to let a customer who can’t pay continue billing can be detrimental. No one wins, if your customer files for bankruptcy or worse, go out of business. Recommended exercise, review customers that haven’t made a payment to you in the last 45 days. These should be a top priority for collections. Make your goal to be first in line not last  Don’t miss out on collecting because you waited too long to send an account.  If you are working with a 3rd party collections agency, do you have an easy process for your collector to recognize it’s time to cut bait? Are the collectors being trained to recognize the warning signs and make quicker decisions? Don’t let your customers get into the 90 and 120-day buckets. They should already be with your third-party agency at that point. That is if you want an opportunity to recover the debt and fast. If you are using the steps outlined above, you should be seeing higher recoveries.    

The credit industry works very differently than it did even a few years ago. In recent years, new technology and the availability of analytics means that credit departments have much more information to make decisions. When both commercial and consumer data is used together, departments unlock a lot of powerful data that can be combined for more accurate decisions. However, some credit departments have not changed their processes and staffing structure. By using the traditional approaches even with new technology and data, credit departments are not able to see all of the possible benefits. I recently spoke on a panel of credit management executives at the High Radius Conference. During the talk, we touched on this topic and talked afterwards about what credit organizations need to do. Jan Minniti, Senior National Account Executive with the National Association of Credit Management mentioned that while many large organizations are using automation, even smaller shops can benefit as well. But her larger point was in order to transform, organizations must change the skill sets that they are recruiting, and expand training offered to current employees. Here are a few keys to help your organization transition to modern credit management: 1. Understand the recent evolution of credit models and technology As Minniti pointed out, we started out with general payment score models that were applied to everyone. However, today more specific models are available (for example, specific to an industry), so you can choose the best model depending on who you are selling to. These new models move us into a new generation where instead of making gut feel decisions or spreadsheets to track data, we can use statistics to not only assess risk, but also assign credit line increases. These scores and credit lines can then be fed to automated tools to manage the order-to-cash process. Even more importantly, we can use automated technology for account management strategies, which increase efficiency, maximize account potential and reduce fraud. In our experience at Experian, we have evidence that machine learning reduces manual reviews by as much as 74 percent. 2. Learn how credit managers can revise their role and processes Research recent changes in the financial services industry for inspiration on what is possible and how to help your department get to the next generation. Typically the FinTechs and large banks are on the leading edge of advances in risk management. By starting with analytics, the financial industry has driven a lot of innovation and change. They have also focused on data management to evolve to a frictionless environment. Think of how your company can incorporate these changes. But most importantly, how you as a credit manager can introduce and drive the change. 3. Revise the credit manager role to include more strategy Instead of shrinking from the change out of concern that technology will replace your role, credit managers need to lead the change. Start by learning what’s possible with regards to both technology and data. Share it with other credit managers and leadership to help your company be an early adopter. But, be careful not to fall into “shiny object syndrome”, where you use technology just because its available, even though it might not yet have the features you need. A solution in search of a problem is always a questionable approach. Minniti says that she knows changing the roles is challenging because it is a big shift and credit is not typically the shiny, new area of the company. However, to reduce risks and impact change, credit managers must seek greater visibility with the C-Suite. “Credit managers should educate management by using reports to show the importance to your company. Use data to show how much money you are saving the company,” says Minniti. “It’s also important to talk about automation, which actually helps credit managers stay relevant instead of replacing their jobs.” Having an automated credit strategy is also a great way to manage in times of turnover, or in trying to up level expertise. 4. Revising staffing and hiring guidelines Minniti says it starts by picking good analysts who can replace you. “If you staff with people who listen to what the machine learning is saying, but don't have the ability to think beyond that then who fills your shoes when you move on? What happens to the credit department?,” says Minniti. “We will always need people to tell the machine what to do, be able to adjust the model when the economy changes.” One of the biggest reasons that many managers and departments are resisting technology is fear of being replaced. This simply isn’t going to happen. Without the experience and background, credit models quickly decay. It is impossible to turn over all of the thinking behind credit decisions to machines. Someone needs to be there to manage the ongoing performance of the models, and make sure the analytics track with changes in the marketplace. Credit departments that take initiative to lead the change, to use the new technology and models, will demonstrate their value to their organization. By using automation and machine learning, the credit department becomes more valuable to the organization instead of less. By proactively managing the change and taking the lead, you can set your department on the right path to lead the transformation of your company as well as the credit industry.

In this week's guest post,  Scott Blakeley shares perspectives on a growing trend in business - Terms Pushback (TPB). Scott is the founder of Blakeley, LLP, a noted expert in the field of creditors’ rights, commercial law, e-commerce and bankruptcy law. Scott regularly speaks to industry groups around the country and via monthly webcasts on the topics of creditors rights and bankruptcy. After a slow sales quarter, a large retail clothing store needs to improve their working capital and cash flow. Before the 2008 recession, the retailer likely would have turned to traditional business credit options. However, after the downturn, lenders changed their qualifications and terms, making traditional credit options a much less desirable option. In some cases, retailers, especially midsize or new businesses, can no longer even qualify for traditional credit sources. Businesses are now increasingly renegotiating their payment terms with suppliers through a program called Terms Pushback (TPB). When a jewelry retailer reviews its payment terms, for example, it sees that the main vendor supplier for jewelry currently requires payment 15 days after delivery. As a deliberate strategy — which is different from a company not having the money to pay its bill — to give the retailer more working capital, they reach out to ask the supplier to change the terms to 30 days. This means they would have access to the money paid to the vendor for 15 days longer; this process is often referred to as trade credit. Credit Today found that the most common extension is for 16 to 30 days, with 45% reporting this range as the most common extension. Impact of Terms Pushback on Suppliers While TPB improves cash flow for customers, it causes issues for suppliers because they must wait longer for their payment. Many consultants are now actively recommending TPB as a best practice. Because international companies more commonly using this strategy, many U.S.-based companies are adopting it due to international influence. Companies operating as middlemen between retailers and manufacturers often face the biggest challenges. Longer terms mean that they have less capital to buy more products and have a higher number of outstanding receivables. Additionally, businesses have lower cash conversion metrics, which can hurt publicly traded companies and cause concern for shareholders. According to Credit Today Bench-marking, 19% of suppliers always or usually say no to requests for extended terms, and 3% usually agree. Interestingly, 4% report that their answer depends on customer size — yes to large customers and no to small customers. However, the majority (63%) of businesses review the requests on their individual merits. However, denying the request often has long-term ramifications. If the business denies the request, the customer must pay or suffer credit damage. Customers often get around this by paying late enough to improve their own cash flow but before credit damage occurs. Even more challenging, suppliers are often hesitant to report customers to credit bureaus because this often permanently damages or even ends the relationship. If a supplier denies the request, the majority of options to get the payment are punitive. For example, the supplier can charge a late fee for payment. However, the customer may still decide that the value of the money for the extra days is worth more than the late fee. Other avenues include implementing a credit hold, having two price lists, terminating credit, firing the customer and reporting the customer to industry groups. However, each of these options permanently damages and probably ends the customer relationship, which may result in loss of a high volume of sales. Effectively Managing Terms Pushback with Supply Chain Finance Programs Supply Chain Finance programs are asset-based lending programs structured to improve a customer’s payment terms, reduce costs and improve cash flow enabling financial institutions to pay suppliers for invoiced services. Suppliers can benefit from SCFP as it receives payment within normal terms or earlier which helps keep the credit team’s credit scoring and risk models consistent. The customers benefits as well as their capital is not tied up in day-to-day operational payments and creates more reinvestment opportunities. When a company receives a TPB request, the first step is evaluating the customer — their credit, the risk, the volume of business and the value of the relationship for the supplier. Often, larger companies have an advantage over smaller companies when negotiating term extensions because their business relationship is worth more to the customer than the monetary value of the shorter term. Here are three best practices to managing TPB requests: Offer incentives for shorter terms. Instead of punitive actions, consider giving customers who pay within shorter terms a discount or an annual volume discount for consistent payment with shorter terms. Actively monitor threshold for customers with extended terms. Suppliers must effectively manage their own cash flow to make payroll and other expenses. By extending too many customer terms, suppliers can jeopardize their own financial stability. Create a team to evaluate requests. By establishing a process to handle the requests and a team to formally evaluate requests, suppliers can more effectively evaluate all aspects of the decision, such as the risks of extending to its own financial health and the risk of losing the client relationship. With a team made representing stakeholders from different departments, all perspectives can be represented and considered. As TPB becomes more common as a strategy, suppliers must proactively create a process to manage requests. Often, extending the terms can improve the customer relationship and even increase the amount ultimately paid. By creating a team and strategy, suppliers can make the smartest decision and actively manage pushback requests. Scott Blakeley is a founder of Blakeley LLP, where he advises companies around the United States and Canada regarding creditors’ rights, commercial law, e-commerce and bankruptcy law. He was selected as one of the 50 most influential people in commercial credit by Credit Today. He is contributing editor for NACM’s Credit Manual of Commercial Law, contributing editor for American Bankruptcy Institute’s Manual of Reclamation Laws, and author of A History of Bankruptcy Preference Law, published by ABI. Credit Research Foundation has published his manuals entitled The Credit Professional’s Guide to Bankruptcy, Serving On A Creditors’ Committee and Commencing An Involuntary Bankruptcy Petition. Scott has published dozens of articles and manuals in the area of creditors’ rights, commercial law, e-commerce and bankruptcy in such publications as Business Credit, Managing Credit, Receivables & Collections, Norton’s Bankruptcy Review and the Practicing Law Institute, and speaks frequently to credit industry groups regarding these topics throughout the country. He is a member on the board of editors for the California Bankruptcy Journal, and is co-chair of the sub-committee of unsecured creditors’ Committee of the ABI. Scott holds an B.S. from Pepperdine University, an M.B.A. from Loyola University and a law degree from Southwestern University. He served as law clerk to Bankruptcy Judge John J. Wilson. He is admitted to the Bar of California.

Today we are very proud to be taking the wrapper off the next generation of our flagship commercial credit management application, BusinessIQSM 2.0. To meet the ever-changing needs of our clients, we continue to grow and modernize with them.  This innovative and powerful analytical web-based application is designed for commercial enterprise and small-business risk management. From the new interface and side bar navigation to enhanced search and match technology, to judgmental and rules-based scorecards, all the way to custom model scores, Experian’s BusinessIQ 2.0 has something for everyone. Let Experian meet you where you are and take you to where you want to be. BusinessIQ 2.0 Overview In this video we highlight some of the key features of BusinessIQ 2.0. Learn more by going to:  

As a Senior Consultant with Experian Advisory Services, Gavin Harding works closely with many of Experian's FinTech and Financial Institution clients to find solutions to complex problems. We sat down recently to talk about bank partnerships, how they come about, what makes them successful, and how Experian supports them. Do you see a lot of collaboration between banks and FinTechs? The latest statistics show that 67 percent of banks and FinTech’s are either currently cooperating, or in discussions about cooperating, or exploring collaboration. So, yes a very significant proportion are considering collaborations. Why collaborate at all? You know it's interesting, they have different skill sets, different assets, different backgrounds. So for example; banks have really deep, broad customer relationships. You know think about your Mom or Dad bringing you to your local bank to open up your first account. Think about your student loan. Think about your mortgage. What kinds of relationships exist? So banks have really deep and broad relationships. But traditionally the experience with banks has not necessarily been great in terms of turnaround, in terms of the friction or pain involved in getting a loan or opening an account. On the other side, FinTech’s are really good at that customer experience. They describe it as either low or no friction. So very quick turnaround times. But they're very much transactional-focused, meaning single products. So FinTech has the technology and the experience, and banks have the depth of relationships with customers. You bring those two parts together and you've got a pretty amazing potential opportunity.  There are as many relationship types shapes and sizes as there are people on the planet. Everything from cooperation on basic operations, meaning, a FinTech takes applications for a bank and then passes them on. All the way over to full-fledged integration of systems, personnel, capabilities, skill sets, and so on. So pretty much the broad spectrum. What works well? So it works really well when they are well-matched. So what I mean by that is, when the skill sets from one organization match the other. When one enhances the other, and it works really well when there are long and detailed discussions and preparations for the relationship. Meaning, they align and discuss goals, objectives, what each organization's role is, what each brings to the table, and very specifically how they are going to cooperate. What are the pitfalls? Well, the same pitfalls. So the pitfalls are that the relationship goals differ, or aren't aligned, or that one organization feels like they are bringing more to the relationship and that the partnership is equal, or when it feels as if each partner, each organization is not getting value from the relationship over time, and once again that reinforces the need for those detailed discussions before getting into that partnership or relationship. How does the process work? So it begins with a discussion. I've seen these partnerships start with a discussion over dinner at a conference. I've seen them start through a LinkedIn connection. I've seen them start over coffee. So it really starts with an exploration of who's out there? What organizations may be interested in even discussing some kind of collaboration? So it starts with the conversation at the very basic level, even when we see in the Wall Street Journal major strategic alliances between organizations, starts with people, and starts with that very simple conversation and connection. What are some key elements to be aware of? Well again it comes down to what each party brings to the relationship and what the goals are. So a good alignment of the capacity of skill sets, an alignment of investment in terms of time and resources, and very specifically a definition of who does what, what the accountabilities are, and what everybody's expectations are. They are fundamental to the success of any type of business arrangement or partnership. How does Experian support these partnerships? So the interesting thing is we have very deep relationships with both sides. So we bring data, solutions, consulting expertise to FinTech’s and to banks. So, it's really interesting we find ourselves in the middle of a lot of these conversations, and how we help is by understanding systems, technology, data, the best of both organizations involved in the conversations, and how to bring all of that together for a good focused efficient successful outcome. A couple of years ago this was new meaning that banks saw FinTech’s growing, and kind of looked at them a little bit maybe as competition, as potentially the enemy, FinTech’s saw themselves as disrupting the world and completely innovative and new. What's starting to happen is both sides are coming together, realizing that they are both part of the same financial industry, serving the same customers, maybe in different or new ways with different products. But in the same industry. So there is very much a coming together, an alignment a co-mingling, consolidation of all these various aspects of the industry. And I think it's really positive for consumers. More products, more quickly, and a better experience overall. Do you think a FinTech's ability to create more dynamic mobile experiences is a key element Certainly and so the big question we help banks answer in this space is, do we build it? Do we buy it? Do we partner? and build and buy or partner refers to the technology the infrastructure and the experience. So if you have a pretty big bank and they've got a old website, old process, lots of paper, lots of regulations, lots of pain in the process. Well they can look at one of the more advanced sophisticated mature FinTech’s and essentially use their platform, their engagement, their data, connect that to the bank's customers and in a very very short time transform that experience in a very positive way for their banking customers.   Learn about FinTech Lending Solutions