![]() Process complexity of the kind that characterizes dispute resolution at most banks results in highly variable individual performance. Instead, leading banks are now embedding regulatory processes into more effective dispute processes. This problem is especially prevalent at larger institutions, where intense regulatory scrutiny often inadvertently makes compliance a higher priority than quality control. Banks and issuers thus miss the opportunity to catch and fix incorrect decisions. At some banks, the process of reviewing dispute decisions is overly focused on checking regulatory boxes rather than on the overall accuracy of the decision. In some cases, banks must turn to third parties to conduct additional research on fraud. In most banks, the dispute process involves multiple IT systems and tends to be driven by the technology the bank has rather than the technology it needs. ![]() This lack of triage allows dispute volume to rise and puts pressure on dispute teams to process disputes quickly to save costs and avoid regulatory infractions. Banks and issuers usually process all disputes above $25, regardless of dollar amount, customer, or the merchant’s dispute history, and apply the same process across the board. To exacerbate matters, most dispute organizations are scattered geographically-some US-based banks have as many as 15 dispute-resolution locations-which intensifies operational complexity. This disjointed model leads to more customer pain points and delays in time-to-credit and overall dispute resolution. The operating model’s complexity obscures distinct ownership of the client experience, and in some cases there is a definitive separation among the functions required to take in and resolve disputes (the call center, dispute research, and the back office). Most banks’ traditional, budget-controlled functional structures lack a clear, end-to-end chain of responsibility for the disputes experience. Today, most banks face a number of costly obstacles as they seek to address a rising number of card disputes: Complex operating models and other obstacles ![]() A number of banks are therefore rethinking the way they manage disputes with an eye toward maintaining and even strengthening their trust-based customer relationships-all while processing disputes more cost efficiently and at lower regulatory risk. As they benefit from growth in credit- and debit-card use, in other words, banks and card providers must ensure that the customer experience is not degraded.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |