.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 finance operations, billing and collections departments increasingly rely on artificial intelligence to streamline processes, reduce human error, and improve recovery rates. As organizations adopt these AI-powered solutions, a critical question emerges: what's the most effective pricing model for these technologies? Should businesses pay for the tools and actions an AI agent performs, or only for the successful outcomes it delivers?
The Rise of Agentic AI in Financial Operations
Billing and collections automation has transformed dramatically with the emergence of agentic AI systems. Unlike traditional automation tools that follow rigid rules, AI agents can navigate complex scenarios, make judgment calls, and learn from interactions over time.
These sophisticated systems can:
- Analyze payment histories to identify high-risk accounts
- Communicate with customers through multiple channels
- Negotiate payment plans autonomously
- Prioritize collection efforts based on probability of recovery
- Document interactions and maintain compliance records
As these capabilities expand, so do the questions around how to price such services fairly and effectively.
Understanding Pricing Models for AI Agents
Tool Usage-Based Pricing
Under a tool usage-based pricing model, businesses pay for the specific functions and capabilities their AI agents utilize. This typically includes:
- Number of customer interactions
- API calls to connected systems
- Document processing operations
- Decision-making events
- Computing resources consumed
This approach resembles traditional software licensing with a usage component. Organizations might purchase credits that are consumed as the AI performs various tasks, regardless of outcomes.
Outcome-Based Pricing
Conversely, outcome-based pricing ties costs directly to measurable business results:
- Percentage of successfully collected debts
- Reduction in days sales outstanding (DSO)
- Improved cash flow metrics
- Increased customer retention despite collection actions
- Compliance risk reduction
With this model, the vendor assumes more risk but potentially shares in greater rewards when the solution performs exceptionally well.
The Case for Tool Usage-Based Pricing
Tool usage-based pricing offers several compelling advantages for billing and collections automation:
1. Predictable Budgeting
Finance departments typically prefer predictable expenses. According to a 2023 Gartner survey, 67% of finance leaders cite budget predictability as a top priority when selecting financial technology solutions.
With credit-based pricing or straightforward tool usage metrics, organizations can forecast costs more accurately and avoid unexpected expenses that might occur with performance-based models during collection surges.
2. Alignment with LLM Ops Reality
The operational reality of large language model (LLM) deployment includes significant costs regardless of outcomes. Computing resources, model training, orchestration systems, and implementation of guardrails all require investment whether or not a particular collection succeeds.
As one financial technology executive noted in a recent FinTech Magazine article: "The infrastructure costs don't disappear just because an account proves uncollectible."
3. Early Stage Implementation Benefits
For organizations just beginning to implement AI agents for collections, usage-based pricing provides valuable data about operational patterns without tying costs to outcomes that may initially be lower during the learning phase.
The Case for Outcome-Based Pricing
Despite the benefits of usage-based approaches, outcome-based pricing has gained significant traction:
1. Direct ROI Alignment
When vendors are paid based on successful collections, their incentives align perfectly with the client's financial goals. Research from McKinsey suggests that outcome-based pricing models in financial services technology can increase vendor performance by 15-20% compared to traditional models.
2. Risk Mitigation for Buyers
"Why should we pay for activity that doesn't improve our bottom line?" This common question from financial executives highlights a key benefit of outcome-based pricing: the technology provider absorbs more implementation and performance risk.
3. Focus on Quality Over Quantity
Outcome-based models encourage AI system providers to optimize for the quality of interactions rather than simply maximizing the number of interactions. This can lead to better customer experiences and higher success rates per engagement.
Hybrid Approaches Gaining Traction
Many organizations are finding that hybrid pricing structures provide the best of both worlds. According to a 2023 study by Deloitte on AI implementation in financial services:
- 58% of successful AI deployments used some form of hybrid pricing model
- The most common structure includes a base subscription fee for tool usage with performance bonuses
- Organizations reported higher satisfaction with vendors who offered flexible pricing options
These hybrid approaches acknowledge that while outcomes matter most, the technology infrastructure required has inherent costs regardless of results.
Factors to Consider When Choosing a Pricing Model
When evaluating pricing options for billing and collections AI agents, consider:
1. Your Recovery Rate Baseline
If your current collection processes have predictable recovery rates, outcome-based pricing becomes easier to implement as performance improvements can be measured against an established baseline.
2. Implementation Maturity
Early-stage AI implementations may benefit from usage-based pricing while the system learns and optimizes. As performance stabilizes, transitioning to more outcome-oriented models might make sense.
3. Vendor Partnership Potential
The best pricing arrangements often emerge from transparent partnerships where both parties understand the costs and value drivers involved. Look for vendors willing to adjust models as your implementation matures.
4. Guardrails and Compliance Requirements
Systems requiring extensive guardrails for regulatory compliance will have higher operational costs regardless of outcomes. These costs need to be accounted for in any pricing model.
Finding Your Optimal Approach
There's no one-size-fits-all answer to whether tool usage or outcomes should drive your AI agent pricing in billing and collections. The most successful implementations typically:
- Start with a clear understanding of current process costs and recovery rates
- Implement robust measurement systems to track both usage metrics and outcomes
- Begin with a pricing model that reflects implementation reality while incentivizing improvement
- Review and adjust the arrangement as the system matures
Whatever approach you choose, ensure that it supports your ultimate goal: improving financial outcomes while maintaining customer relationships and compliance standards.
Conclusion
As agentic AI transforms billing and collections processes, the question of pricing methodology becomes increasingly important. While pure tool usage models offer predictability and acknowledge infrastructure costs, outcome-based approaches create stronger alignment with business goals. For most organizations, some form of hybrid model will likely provide the best balance between fair vendor compensation and measurable business results.
The most effective pricing strategy will ultimately depend on your organization's specific needs, implementation maturity, and relationship with your technology provider. By understanding the trade-offs between different pricing metrics and being willing to evolve your approach over time, you can develop a model that drives both technological adoption and financial performance.