托比编者按：众所周知，国际B2B业务的发展比中国早了约20年，与B2C的占比约为8:2，80%的美国上市公司都是B2B；而在国内，B2B的投资只占全部投资的5%，美国则达到40%。这表明国内B2B未来有着巨大的发展空间。
为帮助国内从业人员了解国际B2B行业发展状况，托比网从即日起开设“国际B2B”栏目，编绎国外重要文章，以最新观点、最新案例、重要消息为主，原则上每日一篇，供行业人参考与借鉴。
托比网致力于成为国内最专注、最专业、最权威的重度垂直媒体，让行业永远有方向，伴随B2B企业共成长。
《安全、灵活、敏捷——B2B支付开发有待创新》作者是比尔?诺斯。需求创造合作。正如标题和文中所说，B2B支付的需求很简单：安全、灵活、敏捷。看似简单，国外市场反馈却依然再反馈这个问题，中国呢？
托比编译必为B2B前沿精品，欢迎转载，请载明“托比网编译”违者必纠。
我们的团队与世界各地的跨国公司工作的公司财务主管经常就B2B支付问题展开对话，简单和灵活这两项是我们一直强调的因素。这既是B2B支付目前面临的问题，又是我们业务开展的目标。
与新闻工作类似，每一笔付款背后都存在一个固定结构：收款人、币种、付款时间与付款金额。这些要素非常简单，然而在操作过程中却显得无比复杂。
例如，我们需要知道银行遵循的不同规则，比如首选渠道、支付类型，甚至要匹配银行对于安全和加密的要求。支付远不像我们想象的简单，而上面的例子仅代表一笔支付，类似的支付在全球各地正在以数十万笔的规模发生着。
要满足上述要求，意味着不合规的付款以及拒绝付款这样的情况需要专业人员应对。这对于企业来说是一种资源浪费，并成为企业财务人员的一大痛点。
一般来说，银行为建立长期信用关系的企业提供一部分支付服务。2008年的经济危机改变了这一点，考虑到回避交易风险，公司们开始与不同的银行建立关系。在这个背景下，银行必须提供有竞争力的产品以争取企业的业务合作。
这是我们多次和企业财务负责人们聊到的另一个痛点。当他们倾向采用某种特定模式处理付款，但银行的技术要求往往形成障碍。
这是另一个主题，在我与财务负责人们的对话中提出了好几次。 他们都说，虽然他们希望使用某家银行进行支付处理，但该银行的技术限制阻止他们这样做。
当企业想使用ISO20022协议（备注：2004年制定并发布的国际金融报文格式）处理所有的付款时，却发现很多银行仅仅支持基于SWIFT协议的付款。例如，一些财务主管告诉我们，他们热衷于对所有支付类型使用ISO 20022格式，以便利用增加的数据字段并协调整个企业的流程。 但不是所有的信用银行都接受这种信息格式，许多只支持SWIFT格式的国际支付。
上面的例子表明，银行应迎合企业的需求，向标准化迈进并提供弹性化的解决方案。反过来银行却认为这样的创新将耗时数年，投资巨大。通过与互联网金融公司合作，银行可以一方面遵循自己的技术原则，一方面保证满足企业支付需求。这样银行将在满足简单灵活两大因素的同时完成敏捷开发。
多年来银行主渴望与银行合作打通支付，但银行却不闻不问。如果这一情况发展下去，这些银行将失去竞争力。
文章来源：Finextra Research
作者简介作者简介：比尔?诺斯 美国派力肯（Pelican公司）国际销售部经理。该公司是世界上最著名的安全防护箱和专业照明产品的生产商，已在全国55个国家拥有超过10亿笔交易，5万亿美金的订单额。该公司的重要举措之一是通过将人工智能应用于支付生命周期（包括合规性操作）来实现智能支付管理。
A brave new world: the need for innovation in B2B paymentsBill North - Pelican
Simplicity and flexibility
In the many conversations our teams have with corporate treasurers working in multinational organisations around the world, these are the two words we find constantly repeated.
This is hardly a surprise. It does, however, beg the question as to why this is still such an issue in the world of B2B payments and what needs to be done to simplify it.
These key points are pretty straight forward, and consistent with every payment. Where it gets complicated is in the execution.
For instance, we need to know which banks require the details and how to get this information across – such as the preferred channel and format for this type of payment. We also need to consider what should be filed to the bank and comply with the required types of security and encryption.
As we can see, the payments process is not quite as simple as first thought. Let’s also remember that the above example represents only one payment – this is a process that is repeated billions of times a day across all regions of the world.
Broken relationship
Historically, banks which had an ongoing credit relationship with a specific corporate got a share of the payments business.
But since the crash of 2008, coupled with counterparty credit risk avoidance activities, companies have now diversified their banking relationships. In this new context, banks must lead product offerings along with establishing competitive pricing in order to stay in the game.
This is another subject that has been brought up several times in conversations I’ve had with treasurers. They all said that while they have a desire to use a certain bank for payments processing, the technical limitations of that bank prevented them from doing so.
For example, some treasurers were telling us that they were keen on using the ISO 20022 format for all payment types, in order to leverage added data fields and harmonise processes across the enterprise. But not all credit banks accept this message format, with many only supporting international payments in SWIFT formats.
Driving innovation
This shows that banks need to listen to treasurers, and start the drive towards standardisation. It also shows that there is a need for banks to innovate in this area, and develop a flexible solution of their own.
This could send banks into a panic. But the drive for innovation doesn’t have to require years of construction that sees development costs run into millions or even billions.
By partnering with a fintech firm, banks can not only have a ready-made system that works with their own technology, but also ensure this is fully compliant while fulfilling corporate payment needs.
There are many opportunities out there to create a simple, flexible solution – but time is of the essence.
Corporate treasurers are screaming out to work with banks on their payments, but if they continue to shut their eyes and ears to the needs of their customers, they will find themselves lagging behind competitors.
