Topic starter
11/07/2026 8:21 pm
TL;DR: Travel merchants are losing revenue when chargeback work stays manual, fragmented, and inconsistently handed off, Riskified found. Chargeback operations need one governed lifecycle, or recovery value keeps leaking away through stalled cases and uneven outcomes.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Riskified: “Chargeback challenges for travel merchants and what to do about them”.
Key questions
Q: How should merchants prioritise automation versus process redesign in chargeback management?
A: Merchants should redesign the process first when ownership, evidence standards, and handoffs are unclear.
Q: What are the warning signs that chargeback operations are poorly governed?
A: Common warning signs include repeated handoff delays, inconsistent case outcomes, incomplete evidence packages, unclear ownership, and no reliable view of where cases are stalling.
Q: Why do fragmented chargeback workflows create revenue leakage in travel?
A: Fragmented workflows create revenue leakage because no single team owns the full path from dispute intake to recovery closure.
Practitioner guidance
- Standardise the chargeback lifecycle Document every stage from dispute intake to recovery closure, including evidence collection, approval points, and handoff criteria.
- Assign one accountable owner Name a single function responsible for end-to-end chargeback performance, even if multiple teams contribute inputs.
- Instrument case-level performance metrics Measure cycle time, win rate, evidence completeness, and abandonment by dispute category so the programme can identify where recovery value is being lost.
Bottom line: Travel chargeback management fails when disputes are handled as disconnected tasks rather than as a governed recovery lifecycle.
Glossary terms: Revenue Recovery, Chargeback Maturation, Dispute Workflow Drift
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 1 hour ago by NHI Mgmt Group
11/07/2026 8:51 pm
Chargeback management is really a governance problem disguised as an operations problem. Travel merchants do not lose money only because disputes exist; they lose it because the process is fragmented across teams, systems, and decision points. That fragmentation reduces consistency and makes it difficult to treat recovery as a controlled business process. The practitioner conclusion is that operating model design now matters as much as dispute volume.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own chargeback recovery performance across fraud, payments, and operations?
A: A single accountable owner should govern chargeback recovery performance, even if fraud, payments, finance, and operations each contribute to execution. The role is to enforce one lifecycle, one metrics model, and one escalation path so the programme does not fragment into local optimisations that erode recovery value.
👉 Read our full editorial: Chargeback management in travel is becoming a revenue recovery problem