When you pay for communication by volume, every decision to send more comes with a question: what is this going to cost us?
Say your team wants to send a new policy update to every customer. Before anyone presses send, someone has to work out the extra cost. Then someone else has to approve it. Amongst all this chaos, sometimes the idea gets dropped because nobody can say for sure what the bill will be and its ROI.
And if you go ahead anyway, the worry doesn’t end. You send it, and then you wait for the invoice to find out how much it cost. Finance has no way to plan for it in advance.
That’s the real problem with volume-based pricing. It’s not just that it costs more as you grow. It’s that you can’t be sure how much financial burden it’s going to put on you, so growing feels like a risk.
An insurer shouldn’t have to think ten times before talking to its own customers.
Where Volume-Based Pricing Hurts
Some of what an insurer sends is a choice. A lot of it isn’t.
Statements have to go out. Policy documents have to go out. If a regulation changes, every affected customer needs a notice, whether it fits the budget or not. A team can’t postpone these to keep a bill down.
Under volume-based pricing, that matters. The documents you can’t skip are also the ones that push your volume up.
There are two kinds of volume:
· Planned volume: Annual statements, renewals, billing runs. You know they’re coming, but the cost still lands in one heavy stretch.
· Unplanned volume: A policy change, a regulatory update, or a correction that needs resending. You can’t see these coming, so they can’t be in the budget.
The second kind is the real headache. Finance sets a number at the start of the year, then something outside the team’s control adds documents to the run. The invoice goes over, and the team has to explain the variance, justify the additional cost, and account for a budget they had little control over. It also puts two teams on opposite sides. Operations needs to send what’s required, and finance needs the bill to stay where it was planned. Neither is wrong, but the pricing model creates a tug-of-war that has nothing to do with serving customers better.
The trouble goes beyond an unpredictable bill. When every additional document costs money, insurers must weigh routine communication decisions against their financial implications. Three problems follow:
· Growth becomes harder to budget for: Expanding a servicing program or sending more frequent customer communications can increase costs before the business has a clear picture of the financial impact.
· Every additional communication needs scrutiny: Teams may hesitate before increasing the frequency of customer updates or expanding a communication program because each decision adds to the bill.
· Necessary communications carry a cost penalty: A regulatory notice or corrected policy document may generate no new revenue, but the insurer still pays to produce and deliver it.
Which CCM Pricing Model Fits Your Needs
That’s the conundrum: should you pay for every document you send, or opt for a flat fee that keeps costs independent of volume?
Volume-based pricing can make sense when document volumes remain relatively stable and predictable. But when regulatory obligations, seasonal workloads, or an expanding omnichannel communication strategy cause volumes to fluctuate, per-document charges can make expenditure harder to anticipate.
Flat-fee pricing offers a different proposition, with costs that remain consistent regardless of how many documents you process, subject to the provider’s terms and usage limits. For insurers anticipating growth or managing unpredictable workloads, that distinction can have significant implications for budgeting and operational flexibility.
To understand which model offers the better fit, let’s compare Cincom Eloquence, OpenText, and Quadient, looking at how their pricing structures accommodate changing communication volumes.
Cincom Eloquence vs. OpenText and Quadient: What Happens When Volume Changes
| Situation | Cincom Eloquence | OpenText | Quadient |
| A regulation changes, and every customer needs a notice | The extra documents add no volume charge | Extra documents can often count toward your volume or capacity, depending on the product and contract | Extra documents often count toward your volume tier |
| You want to send more updates or add a channel | You decide based on value | Typically needs a cost check against your license terms first | Typically needs a cost check against your volume tier first |
| You go past the volume you planned for | No volume overage | Depends on the license model. Capacity or transaction terms can apply | Often leads to a true-up at the end of the year |
| Finance sets next year’s budget | Volume isn’t a variable in the CCM cost | Volume or capacity forecasts are often an input, so a wrong forecast can move the bill | Volume forecasts are often an input, so a wrong forecast can move the bill |
No volume charge. The number you agreed to is the number you pay, however busy the year gets. Cincom Eloquence is the only enterprise CCM platform that never charges for volume. It follows flat pricing.
· OpenText
OpenText pricing is typically customized per customer. Depending on the product and the deal, it often factors in volume, capacity, or transaction throughput, along with features and how it’s deployed. Your bill can follow how much you run through it, and the details usually depend on how the contract is written.
· Quadient
Quadient’s pricing often depends on transaction volume tiers and the modules you pick. Deals are typically multi-year, and going past your agreed volume can often mean a true-up at the end of the year.
Why Flat Pricing Works Better
Flat pricing means you pay an agreed amount, and sending more doesn’t change it. A few things get easier once that’s true.
· The conversation changes: With volume-based pricing, “should we send this?” turns into “what will this cost?” With flat pricing, it’s “does this help the customer?” Teams spend their time on the quality of the communication, not the cost of it.
· Nobody counts documents: There are no volume reports to pull together, no counts to check against an invoice, and no disagreements about how many documents went out. That’s time the team gets back.
· Approvals get shorter: A new campaign or an extra mailing doesn’t need a cost estimate and a sign-off from finance. It only needs a reason.
· Planning goes further out: When the CCM cost doesn’t move with volume, finance can plan it over several years with confidence. Growth plans don’t need a pricing check attached.
· Renewal talks are simpler: You’re not negotiating around a volume forecast that may turn out wrong.
Flat pricing isn’t right for everyone. If your volume is very low and very steady, you may pay more than you’d pay by volume. But for any insurer whose volume rises with regulation, growth, or a busy season, a fixed cost removes a variable that was never in the team’s control.
Moving Forward
Volume-based pricing isn’t wrong. For steady, low volume, it can work fine.
But insurers don’t always get steady volume. A regulation changes, a busy season hits, or the business grows, and the CCM bill moves with it. Teams end up counting documents, justifying invoices, and thinking twice before talking to their own customers.
So, the real question when buying CCM isn’t only what it costs today. It’s what happens to the bill when volume changes.
Before you sign with any vendor, ask:
· What counts toward my volume: documents, pages, channels, or transactions?
· What happens if I go over my agreed volume?
· What does a regulatory notice to every customer cost me?
· Can I forecast next year’s bill within a range I’d be comfortable explaining to finance?
If the answers are clear and the numbers hold up in a bad month, the pricing fits. If they’re vague, that’s your answer too.
FAQs
What should I ask a CCM vendor about pricing?
Ask what counts toward your volume (documents, pages, channels, or transactions), what happens if you go over, and what a notice to every customer would cost you.
Does switching CCM platforms mean rebuilding all my templates?
It often means some rework, but how much depends on your templates, your data sources, and the new platform. Ask any vendor for a migration plan, a timeline, and an estimate for template conversion before you commit.
Is volume-based pricing always a bad deal?
No. If your volume is low and steady, it can work well because the bill stays predictable. It becomes a problem when volume jumps around because of regulation, growth, or busy seasons.
What is flat pricing in CCM, and who is it good for?
Flat pricing means you pay an agreed amount, and sending more documents doesn’t change it. It suits insurers whose volume rises with regulation, growth, or busy seasons, because the CCM cost stays the same no matter how many documents you send.
What are the best open-text CCM alternatives?
There isn’t one best option, because it depends on what you send and how your volume behaves. Start with what you need the platform to do (batch statements, one-off letters, regulated notices), then compare how each option charges. Cincom Eloquence is one alternative to look at if cost predictability matters to you, since it doesn’t charge for volume. For an insurer whose volume swings, the pricing model often matters as much as the features.
