Home Data Forrester Report: Customers And Brands Have Different Definitions Of Value, Transparency

Forrester Report: Customers And Brands Have Different Definitions Of Value, Transparency

SHARE:

fatemehCompanies face a paradox.

Consumers want to be rewarded for their loyalty to a company or brand, but recoil when asked to share their personal data. At the same time, companies risk losing their competitive edge by not personalizing their offerings and acknowledging loyal customers.

Marketers toss around terms like “value” and “transparency” when explaining how to win a customer’s trust, but a company’s understanding of these terms may differ from consumer expectations.

When Forrester Research surveyed approximately 5,000 US adults on why they’d share personal information with companies and how companies can win their trust, it found tangible rewards like cash are more desirable than convenience.

Forty-one percent of respondents said they’d share personal information with companies for cash rewards. Nearly 30% would share their data in exchange for loyalty program points and only 11% chose faster customer service.

Being transparent about how you handle consumers’ data is also critical, said the report’s author, senior analyst Fatemeh Khatibloo. “Despite the demand for relevance and recognition,” she wrote, “customers are loathe [sic] to think that their data is out of their control, and that it’s being used not just for preferential treatment, but potentially to discriminate against them too.”

A transparent privacy policy should explain when the company collects user data, what it does with the data, whether it will sell or share the data and whether it will delete the data when asked to, according to the report.

“Transparency can start with process and design, so that may be the easiest thing that many companies can do,” Khatibloo told AdExchanger. “As for meaningful choice, this is the one that has the most upside for the marketer – there is so much waste in marketing communications, that simply asking customers to choose how they want us to communicate can have a positive effect on marketing efficiency.”

Providing customization options instead of just allowing consumers to opt in or out of interacting with one’s company is another way to keep people engaged. “The single most powerful tool in a marketer’s arsenal is the preference center,” according to Khatibloo.

When given the option, consumers are more likely to tell companies what they prefer, according to the survey findings. Nearly a third of consumers have used a preference center to indicate their channel preferences, and 27% have used one to indicate their frequency or interest preferences.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Implementing these changes can seem extensive and daunting, Khatibloo acknowledged. “The recommendations all disrupt the marketing tech stack a little, so which one a company tackles first depends not only on their desire, but what they can do,” Khatibloo said.

The bottom line, Khatibloo wrote, is that being transparent and offering meaningful choices will make customers receptive to telling businesses how, when and where they want to interact.

Must Read

People Inc.'s Patrick McCarthy (right) chats with Mula's Jason White at AdMonsters' Sell Side Summit Austin.

For Publishers, AI Gives Monetizable Data Insight But Takes Away Traffic

Traffic-starved publishers are hopeful that their long-undervalued audience data will fuel advertising’s automated future – if only they can finally wrest control of the industry narrative away from ad tech middlemen.

Q3: The Trade Desk Delivers On Financials, But Is Its Vision Fact Or Fantasy?

The Trade Desk posted solid Q3 results on Thursday, with $739 million in revenue, up 18% year over year. But the main narrative for TTD this year is less about the numbers and more about optics and competitive dynamics.

Comic: He Sees You When You're Streaming

IP Address Match Rates Are a Joke – And It’s No Laughing Matter

According to a new report, IP-to-email matches are accurate just 16% of the time on average, while IP-to-postal matches are accurate only 13% of the time. (Oof.)

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
Comic: Gamechanger (Google lost the DOJ's search antitrust case)

The DOJ And Google Sharpen Their Remedy Proposals As The Two Sides Prepare For Closing Arguments

The phrase “caution is key” has become a totem of the new age in US antitrust regulation. It was cited this week by both the DOJ and Google in support of opposing views on a possible divestiture of Google’s sell-side ad exchange.

create a network of points with nodes and connections, plain white background; use variations of green and grey for the dots and the connctions; 85% empty space

Alt Identity Provider ID5 Buys TrueData, Marking Its First-Ever Acquisition

ID5 bought TrueData mainly to tackle what ID5 CEO Mathieu Roche calls the “massive fragmentation” of digital identity, which is a problem on the user side and the provider side.

CTV Manufacturers Have A New Tool For Catching Spoofed Devices

The IAB Tech Lab’s new device attestation feature for its Open Measurement SDK provides a scaled way for original device manufacturers to confirm that ad impressions are associated with real devices.