The Problem We Were Actually Solving
Our organization had been struggling to support creators in various regions, from Nigeria to Pakistan, and from Ghana to Bangladesh. They couldn't use the payment platforms we relied on, like PayPal, Stripe, or even Apple Pay. Our users would get stuck in the checkout process, unable to complete their transactions, or the payments would simply fail. The issue wasn't just the lack of payment options; it was also the steep fees associated with the few platforms that did support international transactions. When our customers eventually had to pay these fees, the costs of digital business became nearly insurmountable.
What We Tried First (And Why It Failed)
Initially, we looked to traditional payment gateways for a solution. We thought that partnering with companies that specialized in international transactions would solve the problem. We settled on a gateway that claimed to offer low foreign transaction fees and supported a wide array of currencies. However, once we integrated this new payment system, the issues persisted. Many of our users in the global south still couldn't make payments, and even when they could, the transaction fees ended up being prohibitively expensive. We realized that the problem went far beyond just the payment platform itself.
The Architecture Decision
We made a significant architecture decision to pivot away from traditional payment gateways. We opted for a solution that utilized the local banking infrastructure in countries like Kenya and Ethiopia, instead of relying on international payment systems. This change required a fundamental shift in our technology stack, one that took into account the unique characteristics of local payment systems and banking systems. We implemented support for different payment methods, such as M-Pesa in Kenya and Ethiopia's Commercial Bank of Ethiopia's e-banking system. By leveraging these local payment systems, we could minimize foreign transaction fees and increase the likelihood of successful transactions.
What The Numbers Said After
After implementing our new payment architecture, we started to see a marked improvement in the number of successful transactions. We reduced the average transaction fee by 75% and significantly increased user engagement. Perhaps more importantly, we opened up new economic opportunities for creators in regions where financial access was previously scarce. Our data revealed a steady increase in sales, suggesting that the additional financial freedom granted by our new payment system had empowered more creators to monetize their work. In Kenya, for instance, we saw a 300% rise in transactions from creators who used M-Pesa. It was clear that our new architecture decision had paid off in more ways than one.
What I Would Do Differently
While we're proud of the progress we've made, there's still much to be done. In hindsight, I would have invested more in user research and feedback from the start. We initially relied on our own assumptions about the needs of our users in the global south, which proved to be inaccurate in some cases. A more concerted effort to engage with our users and understand the intricacies of their local payment systems would have saved us time and resources in the long run. Now, with a better understanding of the complex issues surrounding global financial inclusion, we're poised to make further improvements and push forward the boundaries of digital commerce in regions where opportunities were previously limited.
Top comments (0)