In a perfect world, all payments would be made promptly and on time. However, we all know that this is not always the case.
When it comes to overdue receivables, who should be responsible for chasing down payments: credit departments/AR or sales teams?
In this blog post, we will explore both sides of this argument and come to a conclusion based on the pros and cons of each approach.
Let's start off by examining the case that sales reps should be responsible for overdue receivables. After all, they are the ones who originally sold the product or service and are typically the point of contact for the customer.
One argument in favour of this approach is that sales teams know their customers best and are therefore in the best position to chase down payments without damaging relationships.
In addition, sales reps are often compensated based on their performance, so it makes sense to tie receivables to their bonuses or commissions. This would create more of an incentive for them to make sure invoices are paid on time.
On the other hand, there are a few potential drawbacks to this approach. First, it could put undue pressure on sales reps who are already trying to meet their quota and might not have the time or bandwidth to chase payments.
Some people also argue that credit departments/AR are better equipped to handle collections because they have more experience and training in this area.
They also typically have a dedicated team whose sole focus is on receivables so that they can devote more time and resources to collections than a sales team.
There are several pros associated with this approach, including:
There are also several potential drawbacks associated with this approach, including:
Now that we've looked at the potential benefits and risks associated with making sales reps responsible for chasing payments, let's consider a situation in which the AR team handles collections.
Collections being handled by the AR team is the norm in most businesses. The AR team has the expertise and process in place to manage collections efficiently. However, making the AR team solely responsible for collections can result in a few potential problems.
The most obvious potential problem is that the AR team may not be able to collect payment as efficiently as the sales reps who have established relationships with the customers. In addition, if the AR team is too aggressive in their collections efforts, it could damage relationships with customers and result in less sales in the future.
Another potential problem is that, if collections are the responsibility of the AR team, sales reps may be less likely to follow up with customers after a sale to ensure that they are satisfied with their purchase. This could lead to fewer repeat customers and lower overall sales.
There are a few potential benefits of having the AR team handle collections:
There are also a few potential drawbacks to having the AR team handle collections:
So far, we've looked at both of these possibilities in a vacuum. But what if there was a way to have both teams work together to get the money that's owed?
Both sets of teams have different strengths when it comes to collections.
Sales reps have closer relationships with customers, but they may not be as effective at collections as sales reps since they don't have the same relationship with the customer.
While credit departments/AR may not have the same relationships, they may be more effective at collections because it's their job.
So why not combine the two?
Sales reps can provide credit departments/AR with the contact information they need to get in touch with customers. They can also pass along any relevant information about the customer that may be helpful in collections.
And credit departments/AR can provide sales reps with guidance on how to approach customers about overdue receivables.
There are a few ways to do this:
Have AR send out monthly statements to customers and include a list of who their sales rep is. This puts some responsibility on the customer to know who they need to contact, but it also makes it clear to the sales rep that they are responsible for following up.
Another option is to have AR send a weekly list of customers with overdue receivables to the sales reps. This puts the responsibility squarely on the sales reps to follow up, but it also gives them the information they need to do so.
The best option is probably a combination of both monthly statements and weekly lists. This way, both parties are aware of their responsibility and have the information they need to fulfil it.
To help ensure that your organization’s receivables are paid in a timely manner, it’s important to have clear policies and procedures in place. Here are a few best practices to follow:
Effective automation and communication are crucial for both sales and AR teams when it comes to collections. Sales reps need to be kept in the loop so they can follow up with customers, and AR needs to have visibility into which accounts are at risk of going overdue.
Chaser is the perfect solution for keeping everyone on the same page. With our platform, you can automate collections reminders and follow-ups, meaning that sales reps can focus on selling and AR can focus on recovering payments.
Our Payment Portals feature also allows customers to log in and view their invoices, making it easy for them to stay on top of their payments.
With our credit checking tools, you can also assess a customer's creditworthiness before extending terms. This way, you can avoid sales offering payment terms to high-risk customers and reduce the number of overdue invoices.
With so many options available, it can be tough to decide who should be responsible for collections.
What do you think? Is it time to reassess your process and give sales reps a shot at being the primary contact for overdue receivables?
We’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments at marketing@chaser.io.