What distinguishes one payment solution from another?
Given the diversity of offerings, it’s neither the number of features nor the raw technology that makes the difference, but rather their ability to integrate into a given operational ecosystem. A solution that performs well in one context may prove unsuitable in another.
First and foremost, it’s important to consider the structure of the flows to be processed: in-house collection or on behalf of third parties? Single, recurring, or split payments? Is payment guarantee required? Volume to be managed? Centralized or delegated management? Customer type?
Another decisive criterion: compliance. Given their model, some companies are subject to specific regulatory requirements (ACPR, AMF), which must be taken into account.
Finally, the question of integration is crucial. An isolated payment solution, unconnected to internal tools (ERP, CMS, invoicing software, etc.), ends up slowing down teams. Only an interconnected workflow approach can make the entire Order-to-Cash cycle more reliable and automated.
Three types of needs, three solution models
To gain a clearer picture, we can segment the business needs that favor the integration of an online payment solution.
Transactional Performance
Some entities seek above all to maximize conversion: streamlined, available, varied payment methods and facilities, security, etc. This is particularly the case for Pure Players in e-commerce. Payment is primarily a sales lever, volume-oriented, and must be fast and easy to integrate. Performance takes precedence over structure.
Management and Compliance
Other companies operate with more complex flow models (marketplaces, platforms, networks, and business groups, etc.). Payment doesn’t stop at collection. Third parties must be onboarded, their identity verified, funds allocated, and supporting documents produced. In this context, the solution becomes an orchestrator: capable of managing multiple circuits, managing compliance (KYC, KYB), and tracking and tracing flows, all in complete security.
Automation and Advanced Integration
In more traditional environments, often B2B, the challenges are of a different order. Payment is integrated into an already structured Order-to-Cash chain, with its business tools, deadlines, and accounting specifics. These are long, complex, multi-channel cycles, often accompanied by document flows (quotes, invoices, purchase orders). Payment must then be finely integrated with management tools (ERP, customer portal, invoicing software) and enable advanced automation, total traceability, and native compatibility with the existing environment.
B2C and B2B: same payments, different logics
Online payment solutions do not always distinguish between B2C and B2B. Payment collection remains central, but the mechanisms and conditions differ profoundly.
| Criteria | B2C | B2B |
| Preferred payment methods | Bank card, Apple Pay / Google Pay | SEPA bank transfer, corporate bank card |
| Preferred payment facilities | One-click, BNPL, subscription | Deposit/balance, deferred, split, subscription |
| Cycle length | Immediate or within a few hours | 30, 45 or 60 days |
| Stakeholders involved | End customer and merchant | Buyer, sales, finance, accounting, logistics/production |
Towards new, specific rather than standardized solutions?
For a long time, payment solutions were designed as generic, integrated blocks capable of handling the majority of use cases. But as organizations become more digital and models become more complex, this approach is showing its limitations.
In multi-entity, regulated, or highly integrated environments, standard solutions generate friction: manual reprocessing, post-clearance controls, lack of consolidated visibility, and operational overhead for finance or IT teams. This is why new online payment solutions are emerging, designed from the ground up to meet specific needs and capable of structuring flows to serve business lines.
