.png)
Frameworks, core principles and top case studies for SaaS pricing, learnt and refined over 28+ years of SaaS-monetization experience.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of vendor risk management, AI agents are transforming how businesses handle third-party risk assessment and monitoring. But as organizations consider implementing these powerful tools, a crucial question emerges: what's the optimal pricing model? Should you pay per seat, per action, or based on outcomes? The pricing strategy you choose not only impacts your bottom line but can fundamentally shape how effectively you utilize vendor risk automation in your organization.
The Rise of Agentic AI in Vendor Risk Management
Vendor risk management has traditionally been labor-intensive, requiring dedicated teams to manually review documentation, conduct assessments, and monitor ongoing compliance. Enter agentic AI – autonomous AI systems designed to perform complex tasks with minimal human supervision.
These AI agents can now:
- Automatically scan vendor documentation for compliance issues
- Continuously monitor vendor risk signals
- Generate comprehensive risk reports
- Recommend remediation actions
- Maintain audit trails for regulatory purposes
As these capabilities mature, organizations are increasingly turning to vendor risk automation to enhance efficiency, accuracy, and coverage. But the question of how to price these solutions remains complex.
Understanding the Three Primary Pricing Models
Per-Seat Pricing: Traditional But Limited
The per-seat pricing model is familiar to most software buyers – you pay for each user who needs access to the system.
Advantages:
- Predictable costs that scale with team size
- Simple to understand and budget for
- Clear alignment with direct user value
Disadvantages:
- Discourages wider adoption across teams
- May not reflect the actual value derived from the AI agent
- Creates artificial barriers to collaboration
Per-seat pricing makes sense when the value of the AI agent is directly tied to individual users actively engaging with the system. However, for vendor risk automation, the most significant value often comes from the system working autonomously, not from user interaction.
Per-Action Pricing: Usage-Based Value
Usage-based pricing models charge based on the volume of actions the AI agent performs – such as vendor assessments completed, documents analyzed, or risk alerts generated.
Advantages:
- Aligns costs with actual system usage
- Scales proportionally with program growth
- Provides flexibility for varying usage patterns
Disadvantages:
- Less predictable budgeting
- May disincentivize comprehensive risk coverage
- Potential for unexpected costs during high-usage periods
According to a 2023 OpenView Partners report, SaaS companies with usage-based pricing grew 38% faster than those with static pricing models. This approach can be particularly effective for vendor risk agents as it directly ties costs to the work being performed.
Per-Outcome Pricing: Results-Driven Model
Outcome-based pricing represents the most advanced approach, where costs are tied directly to the value delivered – such as risk incidents prevented, compliance violations identified, or regulatory fines avoided.
Advantages:
- Perfect alignment between cost and value
- Shared risk between vendor and customer
- Incentivizes continuous improvement of the AI agent
Disadvantages:
- Complex to implement and measure
- Requires sophisticated tracking mechanisms
- May involve higher base costs due to vendor risk-sharing
A McKinsey study found that outcome-based pricing models can increase customer satisfaction by up to 40% while improving vendor margins by 15-25% when properly executed.
The Hybrid Approach: Credit-Based Pricing
Many leading AI agent platforms are now implementing credit-based pricing systems that combine elements of all three models:
- Base platform fee (covering basic infrastructure)
- Credit allocation (for various AI agent actions)
- Premium outcomes (special pricing for high-value results)
This approach provides flexibility while maintaining predictability. Organizations purchase credit bundles and allocate them across different vendor risk activities based on their priorities.
Key Considerations When Selecting a Pricing Model
1. Program Maturity
The optimal pricing model often depends on your vendor risk program's maturity:
- Early-stage programs: Per-seat or simple credit-based models provide predictability while you establish processes
- Growing programs: Usage-based pricing aligns with expanding scope and scale
- Mature programs: Outcome-based pricing maximizes ROI as you have clear metrics for success
2. Guardrails and LLM Ops
When implementing agentic AI for vendor risk, consider how the pricing model accounts for essential guardrails and LLM operations:
- Does the pricing include monitoring for AI hallucinations?
- Are orchestration capabilities priced separately or included?
- How are model updates and fine-tuning handled?
According to Gartner, organizations that implement robust AI guardrails experience 60% fewer critical AI incidents. Ensure your pricing model doesn't discourage proper safeguards.
3. Value Attribution
The most sophisticated pricing models include clear value attribution mechanisms:
- Tracking specific risk incidents prevented
- Measuring efficiency gains over manual processes
- Quantifying compliance improvements
Without these measurements, outcome-based pricing becomes difficult to implement fairly.
Real-World Examples
Several vendor risk platforms demonstrate these different approaches:
Company A offers traditional per-seat pricing at $1,500/user/month, but struggles with adoption as security teams limit licenses.
Company B uses action-based pricing ($10 per vendor assessment, $5 per continuous monitoring alert), creating predictable costs aligned with program activity.
Company C pioneered outcome-based pricing, charging a base platform fee plus success fees based on identified risks that would have otherwise been missed by manual processes.
Making the Right Choice for Your Organization
When evaluating pricing models for vendor risk agents, consider these questions:
- How distributed is your risk management team?
- Do you need occasional deep analysis or continuous monitoring?
- Can you clearly measure and attribute outcomes?
- What's your budget predictability requirement?
- How will usage scale as your vendor ecosystem grows?
Conclusion: Aligning Pricing With Strategic Value
The optimal pricing model for vendor risk automation should align with how your organization derives value from the technology. While per-seat pricing remains common, the industry is clearly moving toward usage and outcome-based models that better reflect the autonomous nature of AI agents.
As you evaluate vendor risk solutions, look beyond the simple cost comparisons to understand how each pricing structure might influence adoption, usage patterns, and ultimately, the security outcomes you achieve. The right pricing model doesn't just fit your budget—it accelerates your journey toward comprehensive, efficient vendor risk management.
The future of vendor risk management lies in intelligent automation, and selecting the right pricing model is a crucial step in realizing its full potential for your organization.