annual data tracking study - dma

Annual Data TrackingStudy

Insight partner Partners

2011

E�ective Marketing Research

DATA TRACKING STUDY 2011

COPYRIGHT: THE DIRECT MARKETING ASSOCIATION (UK) LTD 20111

Sponsors perspective 2

Introduction and overview 3

Wining and losing trust 4

The information exchange 13

Consumers exercise the option 18

The savvy consumer gets wary 25

Consumers protecting their data 30

The DMA 36

Partners 37

Copyright and disclaimer 39

Contents



Trust has to be earned, and in some cases we’re not quite there yet

People like doing business with people they trust, and the same applies to brands. If you’re happy with a product or service, you will, in all likelihood, repeat that custom. It’s not rocket science, and yet trust remains the holy grail of marketing. It’s at the heart of brand consideration and data driven marketing is no different. The problem is that trust can be lost all too easily and all too quickly.

A sure-fire way to lose consumer trust is through poorly targeted marketing. As marketers we’ve been beating that drum for over 20 years, and we’d like to think that we’ve reached a point where the direct marketing industry fully appreciates the irreversible damage that can be done. It’s all about understanding the customer and the data you need to make a difference to them. The partnership between Communisis and Equifax ensures that we have a data set both wide and deep enough to make the difference.

But whilst things have become more sophisticated in the traditional DM world, they are still very much in their infancy online.

Anybody that has signed up to one of the many online voucher aggregation services available will recognise just how prevalent poorly targeted marketing still is. Despite the roaring success of these voucher services, how many offers that you’ve received can you honestly say have been relevant to you, let alone opened, clicked or redeemed? It’s a business model that’s still evolving and one that’s reminiscent of the early days of DM.

But this bedding-in period doesn’t just apply to businesses; it’s something that consumers need to be conscious of too. The recent legal posturing from a high profile footballer saw tens of thousands of Twitter users threatened with jail for revealing the details of his super injunction. While clearly an unworkable move, it highlighted how new this territory is, and also how users of social media can sometimes believe they are above the law and protected by a cloak of anonymity.

Before long, users of Twitter, Facebook et al will realise the potential ramifications of how open social media platforms are, and how everything, if necessary, is completely traceable. However, this is a transient phase and as the likes of social media ad targeting get smarter, people will learn and become more cautious in what they choose to share online. The boom in social media used worldwide represents an opportunity for marketers so vast that it would have been incomprehensible to those present at the birth of DM, and any successes to be had will be built firmly on trust.

Charles Ping Chris Sherlock

Sponsors perspective



Introduction and overviewDenial of access - consumers take charge of their own dataBy Chris Combermale, executive director, The Direct Marketing Association

Data is a valuable business asset. It is also fundamental to modern marketing - digital and mobile channels are not only highly targetable, they offer deep personalisation and the ability to understand a consumer’s preferences and behaviour in depth.

Trust is another key business asset. Marketing works hard to build it through creating brand status, offering a consistent and value-adding experiences and being responsive to the customer’s needs.

In the past, data that was necessary for marketing was captured in a way the consumer was obliged to comply with - not being able to progress past an initial web page without registering, for example. In return, the organisation made statements intended to build trust with the individual that their personal information would be handled responsibly and securely.

This model is changing and fast. Social media are shifting the consumer’s expectations in ways that are often unforeseen and some of these new attitudes are emerging in the DMA’s six-monthly Data Tracker research. One of the most significant is the sense some consumers have that they should be able to interact online in an anonymous fashion without providing any personal information.

When creating a social media account, for example, only 32 per cent of consumers are willing to provide their name and 37 per cent do not want to provide any personal information at all. As can be seen from recent injunction-breaking Twitter feeds, many users of social media do not accept the conventional rules of engagement.

This creates a problem for marketers who are used to a value exchange in which consumers provide their data because they trust the brand. In the new climate, the starting point for building trust may be a reversal of that model - trust is created because brands provide services or information without asking for personal data. Only once that initial engagement has taken place will it perhaps become possible to start a real conversation and build more detailed information.

Inducements to provide data do still have a role to play - around one in four consumers will share information if they see a direct return, such as through money-off vouchers, competition entries or discounts. Some of the new models for data collection make this exchange highly transparent - others provide enhanced control and visibility of how data is being used as the basis of the trade (the DMA-sponsored test of mydex is one example where this is happening).

Digital marketing is challenged by these shifting attitudes just as much as direct marketing. Creating an online account to avoid the need for data entry in the future is no longer a persuasive argument - half of consumers say they will only do this after several interactions with a site, while 23 per cent say they never create online accounts.

As the new “Cookies Law” makes clear, marketing can no longer take the consumer’s consent for granted. The old certainty that individual data would be available, accessible and usable is being eroded by technology and services that put the consumer back in control.

In other words, data is now something brands have to use marketing to obtain, rather than something they already have and can then use for marketing. Many brands already have that consumer trust - the rest need to work out how to earn it in order to maintain their data-driven marketing in the new era.



Key Points

Companies have not completely sealed the deal with consumers when it comes to understanding why their personal information is needed. Even when using an essential service, buying something or asking for credit, only a minority of consumers say they would be prompted to give their data. While this may not be possible in reality, it is suggestive of an underlying attitude among many consumers that has not fully bought into the concept that personal information is the price of entry.

By contrast, trust is the most persuasive factor in overcoming such barriers. Brands that are trusted by the consumer will readily be given personal information by the majority. Marketing can further enhance this through providing additional value in exchange via promotional benefits. However, some of these techniques appear to be less effective than six months ago, with clear privacy policies less persuasive than before.

Trust varies widely across sectors when it comes to trusting organisations with personal information - lawyers have the highest level and political parties the lowest. Most sectors (except politics) have a positive balance of trust, although it is not especially strong in most cases.

Losing trust is most likely to happen if the consumer has a bad experience. Theft or misuse of personal information can have a major impact, ranging from fraud to identity theft. Yet it is a climate of fear, created through media coverage, that worries three out of ten consumers, while misuse of data in marketing is a growing concern - one year ago, one in five consumers mentioned this would cause them to lose trust in a brand. Now, one in four give this as a reason.

Just over one in five consumers say they have directly experienced a breach of their personal data security. This ranges from a company holding their data contacting them to say there has been a problem, through to important documents being lost or failing to arrive by post. While these have typically been experienced by between 3 and 5 per cent of consumers, 7 per cent have only read about a breach at a company that holds their data. This may point to a gap in notification procedures or equally to an enhanced fear about the losses that is not reflected in what really happens.

1.Prompts to provide personal information (Wave 3)

1. Winning and losing trust

Trust the companyThey provide essential service

Want to buy somethingClear privacy policy

Free samplesCompetitions

Asking for creditDiscounts

Money-off vouchersFrequent shopper points

Free shippingStore cards

Policy of satisfactionNone of the above

0 25 50 75 100

189

1620212424252628

333941

54

April 2011

prompts to provide information



Which of the following would prompt you to give your personal details to a company/organisation?

Apr 2011

I trust the company 54

Because they provide essential service to me 41

If you want to buy something 39

Clear privacy policy 33

Free samples 28

Competitions 26

If you are asking for credit facilities 25

Discounts 24

Money off vouchers 24

Frequent shopper points 21

Free shipping 20

Store cards 16

Policy of satisfaction 9

None of the above 18

Trust is the most important factor when asking consumers for personal information, ahead of an essential service •the consumer must use or a transaction they want to carry out. In markets where consumers have a choice between rival providers, it is clear that trusted brands will gain the highest market share.

Marketing can influence data capture rates through writing the privacy policy clearly or by offering a direct value •exchange (samples, competition entries, discounts, money-off). Extra value in the form of loyalty points or free shipping can also influence willingness to provide data.

Resistance to providing personal information can also be found despite the best efforts of brands and marketers. •Nearly one in five consumers (18 per cent) resist providing data in all circumstances.

2.Prompts to provide personal information (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Free shippingFrequent shopper points

DiscountsCompetitions

Trust the companyStore cards

They provide an essential servicePolicy of satisfaction

Free samplesWant to buy something

Money-off vouchersAsking for credit

Clear privacy policyNone of the above

-8 -5 -2 1 4

4-6

-5-4

-3-3-3

-2-2

0000

1

Prompts to provide information

Wave 3 v Wave 2



Which of the following would prompt you to give your personal details to a company/organisation?

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Free shipping 1

Frequent shopper points 0

Discounts 0

Competitions 0

I trust the company 0

Store cards -2

Because they provide essential service to me -2

Policy of satisfaction -3

Free samples -3

If you want to buy something -3

Money off vouchers -4

If you are asking for credit facilities -5

Clear privacy policy -6

None of the above 4

Trust has remained stable as a reason for sharing personal information, as have most rewards (points, discounts, •competition entries). Consumers have ample reasons to look for the reassurance of stable brands and also for additional value during transactions, given the broader economic picture.

Some types of value exchange (samples, money-off) have softened in appeal as incentives to provide personal •information. Both of these are linked to the specific product which may explain their weaker appeal compared to rewards the consumer can choose to redeem as they choose.

The most notable shift in attitudes over the last six months has been in the acceptance that providing personal •information is fundamental during the use of services, purchasing or asking for credit. Consumers are not just reining in their activities, but also their general engagement with commercial organisations.

Clear privacy policies are not achieving the impact they had six months ago, showing the biggest fall of 6 per •cent. This may simply be due to a growing familiarity with better data protection notices.



3.Trust with personal information by sector (Wave 3)email.

Please rank the following sectors on how much you trust them with any personal information they may hold about you.Apr 2011 High level

of trustTrust to a degree

Distrust to a degree

High level of distrust

Legal services (eg, Solicitors) 23 52 17 8

Savings 16 55 20 9

Charities 10 57 25 9

Banking 16 48 20 16

Mortgage 13 50 24 13

Public services/central government (eg, NHS, DVLA, HMRC, DWP, COI)

11 51 23 15

Home shopping 7 53 28 12

Local government (eg, Councils, Education Authorities, Police)

10 47 28 15

Telecoms 7 51 29 13

Credit card 10 47 25 18

Utilities 7 53 26 14

Political parties 4 29 37 31

Consumers continue to trust their personal information to sectors they rely on most - legal, financial and central •government services enjoy the highest ratings. The depth of trust displayed can be questioned in some sectors, however, with only one in ten consumers expressing the highest level of trust in charities, central and local government.

Sectors that consumers can choose whether to engage with, such as home shopping or credit cards, have softer •levels of trust, but still benefit from an overall positive view. Telecoms providers enjoy a similar level of trust.

Levels of trust with personal information by sector

Mean Score (4 = High Level of Trust)

Legal servicesSavings

CharitiesBanking

MortgagePublic services/central government

Home shoppingLocal government

TelecomsCredit card

UtilitiesPolitical parties

0 1 2 3 4

2.08

2.25

2.49

2.52

2.52

2.55

2.58

2.63

2.64

2.70

2.78

2.90



Utilities have the weakest trust level among companies that provide services consumers have to make use of, •although six out of ten still hold a positive view of these providers. Only political parties suffer from a strongly negative balance with 68 per cent of consumers distrusting them either to some degree or a high degree to hold personal information.

4.Trust with personal information by sector (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Please rank the following sectors on how much you trust them with any personal information they may hold about you.

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Home shopping 4

Charities 3

Public services/central government (eg, NHS, DVLA, HMRC, DWP, COI)

2

Political parties 2

Local government (eg, Councils, Education Authorities, Police)

0

Telecoms -3

Legal services (eg, Solicitors) -4

Savings -6

Utilities -6

Banking -9

Credit card -9

Mortgage -10

Levels of trust with personal information by sector

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Home shopping

Charities

Public services/central government

Political parties

Local government

Telecoms

Legal services

Savings

Utilities

Banking

Credit card

Mortgage

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6

-10

-9

-9

-6

-6

-4

-3

0

2

2

3

4



Trust in financial services to handle personal information responsibly continues to fall, with all types of provider •suffering significant drops in trust levels. (Research was undertaken in April 2011 during the coverage of payment protection insurance mis-selling which is likely to have kept trust - or lack of it - in financial services generally front of mind.)

There are signs of trust returning to sectors that consumers have a choice about engaging with - both home •shopping and charities increased their trust levels compared to six months ago. The absence of any significant recent data breaches in these sectors may also be helping to restore their standing.

Central government may also be seeing some restoration of trust, four years after the HMRC data loss. •

5.Causes for loss of trust (Wave 3 v Wave 2 v Wave 1)

What would be the primary cause for you to lose trust in a brand to handle your data responsibly?

April 2011 Sept 2010 May 2010

Bad personal experience 46 45 49

Bad press due to losing customer data/data breaches/data misuses

29 30 30

Receiving unwanted marketing materials 26 25 21

Having personal information compromised by an organisation can have a direct impact on a consumer’s life, •which is why a bad personal experience continues to be the most likely reason for a loss of trust. Fear of this has been the strongest reason cited by consumers in all three waves of research for losing trust in a brand’s ability to handle their personal information.

A climate of fear around data breaches has been created by constant media exposure of brands who have lost or •had personal data stolen, such as the recent massive hack into Sony’s systems. This type of bad press over the last year makes three in ten consumers say they would lose trust in a brand.

Bad personal experience

Bad press for data loss/data breaches

Receiving unwanted marketing

0 15 30 45 60

21

30

49

25

30

45

26

29

46

Causes for loss of trust

April 2011 Sept 2010 May 2010



Marketers have the ability to avoid loss of trust among one quarter of consumers by reducing unwanted •communications. This group say that unsolicited marketing leads to a loss of trust, reflecting a growing sensitivity about whether data is being used appropriately by brands which have been trusted with it.

6. Experience of personal data security breach (Wave 3)

In the last six months has your personal security been breached in anyway?

Apr 2011

Read that an organisation holding my data has had a data breach 7

Have been advised of a data breach by a company holding my data 5

Received bills or receipts for goods or services you haven’t asked for 5

Items that you do not recognise appear on your bank or credit card statement

5

Had your bank or credit cards cancelled due to an attempted transaction by someone other than you

5

Important documents lost or stolen ie passport, driving licence, bank statements

3

False alias on a social networking site 2

Post from your bank or utility company not arrived 2

Other 2

None of the above 79

Has your personal security been breached?

April 2011

Read organisation had a data breach

Been advised of a data breach

Received bills for something haven’t asked for

Items do not recognise on bank/credit card statement

Had bank/credit cards cancelled

Important documents lost or stolen

False alias on a social networking site

Post from your bank/utility not arrived

Other

None of the above

0 20 40 60 80

79

2

2

2

3

5

5

5

5

7



One in five consumers have experienced some form of data security breach in the last six months, indicating the •potential scale of data losses companies need to be aware of. It should be noted that not all of these breaches have been directly experienced - 7 per cent of consumers have just read about a company which holds their data having had a data breach, compared to 5 per cent having been told by a company that this has happened.

More serious experiences range from being charged for goods and services that weren’t asked for, bills for items •that are not recognised or attempted transactions by a third party (all reported by 5 per cent of consumers each).

The most serious impacts are from credit cards being cancelled due to fraudulent use attempts (5 per cent), lost •documents (3 per cent), or false aliases being used in social networks (2 per cent).

7.Experience of personal data security breach (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

In the last six months has your personal security been breached in anyway?

Apr 2011

Read that an organisation holding my data has had a data breach 3.4

Received bills or receipts for goods or services you haven’t asked for 2.3

Have been advised of a data breach by a company holding my data 1

Important documents lost or stolen ie passport, driving licence, bank statements

0.8

Items that you do not recognise appear on your bank or credit card statement

0

Had your bank or credit cards cancelled due to an attempted transaction by someone other than you

0

False alias on a social networking site -0.2

Post from your bank or utility company not arrived -1.8

Other, please specify -0.8

None of the above 0.9

Has your personal security been breached?

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Read organisation has had a data breach

Received bills for something haven’t asked for

Been advised of a data breach

Important documents lost or stolen

Items do not recognise on bank/credit card statement

Had your bank or credit cards cancelled

False alias on a social networking site

Post from bank/utility not arrived

Other

None of the above

-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

0.9

-0.8

-1.8

-0.2

0

0

0.8

1.0

2.3

3.4



Awareness of data breaches through media coverage has increased over the last six months, not surprisingly •as the latest research was carried out during the Sony data breach. But there has been a 1 per cent rise in consumers being notified directly by a company holding their data that a breach has occured. Loss or theft of key documents has also risen by nearly the same amount.

Real impacts from data breaches have also risen, with 2.3 per cent more consumers being billed for things •they did not order personally. Items on bills which the consumer does not recognise continue to feature as an experience of data breaches.

Lost post has declined as a form of data security breach, perhaps as a result of greater security measures by both •data controllers and postal services. There has also been a small decline in misuse of data to create online aliases.



Key Points

There is an emerging risk of a “data famine” for marketers as consumers increasingly withhold personal information, even where it might be expected as part of the interaction.

Consumers are seven times more likely to trust their personal information to a company they already have a relationship with than one they don’t. They are also twice as likely to share data with aspirational brands or companies in the same group as with unknown companies. The majority of consumers also accept data sharing for marketing by companies they have to deal with, such as insurance providers.

Attitudes towards sharing data for marketing are constantly shifting, with consumers currently more willing to give their data to companies in the same group as one they currently trade with as well as to unknown businesses. Yet they have become less willing to give data to known companies, aspirational brands and essential service providers than six months ago.

A split between what marketers assume and what consumers expect is evident around the data consumers are willing to provide in specific circumstances. Even where the activity might be expected to require standard demographics (name, address), a bare majority accept this for online buying, but not for other actions. Social media are making anonymity the norm.

Attitudes appear to be shifting away from key personal identifiers, even as it has become somewhat easier to ask for date of birth of credit card data.

8.Companies Happy to Share Marketing Data With (Wave 3)

2. The information exchange

Companies have a relationship with

Sells products have to buy

No relationship, same group

Products might consider buying

Companies don’t have a relationship with

0 20 40 60 80

10

20

23

56

71

Companies happy to share information with

April 2011



Are you happy to share your personal information for marketing purposes with known/unknown companies?

Apr 2011

Companies I have a relationship with 71

A company that sells products that I have to buy (eg, an insurance provider)

56

Companies that I don’t have a relationship with but which are connected to a company I do have a relationship with (same group or partnership programme)

23

A company that sells higher value products that I might consider buying in the future (eg, a games software provider launching a new title)

20

Companies I don’t have a relationship with 10

Not all companies are equal in the information value exchange. Brands with an existing relationship with the •consumer enjoy a seven-fold advantage in the willingness of consumers to share their personal information for marketing compared to those businesses where no relationship exists.

That advantage only extends so far. Companies in the same group as a brand with an existing relationship to the •customer only enjoyt a two-fold uplift in the levels of information sharing compared to unknown businesses. That is still useful leverage when trying to extend a customer’s product portfolio.

Consumers see a difference between aspirational brands and cold companies - they are twice as willing to share •their personal information with companies selling higher-value products. This reflects the prospect phase of the buying cycle where a consumer may be considering or researching a brand long before they are ready to purchase.

Despite the attitude identified elsewhere of resistance to providing information where it might be thought •essential (using a service, buying something or asking for credit), a more realistic view is identified here - the majority are happy to be marketed to using their data by companies providing key products or services.

9.Companies Happy to Share Marketing Data With (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Companies happy to share information with

No relationship, same group

Companies don’t have a relationship with

Companies have a relationship with

Sells products have to buy

Products might consider buying

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

-3

-3

-3

3

4

Wave 3 v Wave 2



Are you happy to share your personal information for marketing purposes with known/unknown companies?

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Companies that I don’t have a relationship with but which are connected to a company I do have a relationship with (same group or partnership programme)

4

Companies I don’t have a relationship with 3

Companies I have a relationship with -3

A company that sells products that I have to buy (eg, an insurance provider)

-3

A company that sells higher value products that I might consider buying in the future (eg, a games software provider launching a new title)

-3

Data sharing is a shifting parameter for marketers. Willingness to share information has declined over the last six •months for companies where a relationship already exists, essential providers and aspirational brands alike. This may simply reflect constrained consumer buying activity driving lower interest in being offered other products and services.

By contrast, companies that are not known to the consumer - or are just in the same group as one they already •trade with - have seen an uplift in willingness to share data. This is encouraging for marketers looking to develop their market share in the difficult data environment they currently face.

Different samples between each wave of surveys are likely to explain most of this difference - indicating the •importance of having a multi-strand data strategy to cover all consumer segments. As some consumers become more willing to share their data, others may pull out of the market.

10.Data Elements Willing to Share (Wave 3)

Buying goods online

Creating an email account

Requesting a quote

Requesting a free sample / money off coupon / voucher

Requesting more information / a brochure

Creating a social media account

Pledging support for a cause 35

37

22

22

19

15

13

10

2

5

5

6

7

74

13

3

4

6

7

8

33

10

29

11

13

29

34

29

10

8

16

14

34

20

50

19

33

40

43

47

51

54

14

9

44

43

37

26

58

21

32

43

44

44

49

53

Willingness to share data

Name Address Email

Telephone

Credit/Debit card details None

Date of Birth Bank details



What personal details are you willing to share?April 2011 Name Address Email Telephone Date of

BirthBank details

Credit / Debit card details

None

Buying goods online 53 58 54 50 29 33 74 13

Creating an email account 49 26 51 20 34 8 7 15

Requesting a quote 44 37 47 34 29 7 6 19

Requesting a free sample / money off coupon / voucher

44 43 43 14 13 6 5 22

Requesting more information / a brochure

43 44 40 16 11 4 5 22

Creating a social media account 32 9 33 8 29 3 2 37

Pledging support for a cause 21 14 19 10 10 13 10 35

Sharing data happens in two modes - where it is seen as necessary (buying goods online, creating an email •account, requesting quotes, samples or information) and where it is seen as optional (creating a social media account or pledging support to a cause). It might be assumed by marketers that consumers accept the need to provide their name and address during essential transactions, yet it is clear this is not the always the case. Optional activity, especially social media and pledging support, are not seen as requiring a postal address and are nearly heading towards anonymity.

Not all data is equal - consumers are highly selective about the pieces of personal information they are willing to •share, depending on the activity. Notably, it has become as unacceptable to ask for a telephone number in most scenarios (except for online ordering) as to ask for date of birth.

Email addresses are more accessible than postal addresses in four out of seven scenarios, indicating which is •now the most preferred contact channel. This creates a challenge to marketers who are able to derive extensive information about an individual via their postcode, but not from an email address.

11.Data Elements Willing to Share (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Willingness to share data

Name Address Email

Telephone

Credit/Debit card details None

Date of Birth Bank details

Creating a social media account

Pledging support for a cause

Requesting a quote

Requesting a free sample/money-off coupon/voucher

Requesting more information/brochure

Creating an email account

Buying goods online 1

2

6

3

2

-5

-5

19

6

5

5

6

4

2

20

7

4

6

7

10

3

9

6

5

1

3

3

8

12

3

6

5

10

0

2

-21

-15

-16

-16

-21

-21

-14

-18

-18

-23

-20

-18

-19

-6

-27

-26

-31

-28

-29

-31

-19



What personal details are you willing to share?Wave 3 v Wave 2 Name Address Email Telephone Date of

BirthBank details

Credit / Debit card details

None

Creating a social media account -19 -6 -14 2 8 3 2 -5

Pledging support for a cause -31 -19 -21 0 3 10 4 -5

Requesting a quote -29 -18 -21 10 3 7 6 2

Requesting a free sample/money-off coupon/voucher

-28 -20 -16 5 1 6 5 3

Requesting more information/brochure

-31 -23 -16 6 5 4 5 6

Creating an email account -26 -18 -15 3 6 7 6 2

Buying goods online -27 -18 -21 12 9 20 19 1

Demographic data which marketers have become used to capturing routinely is getting harder to obtain from •consumers - name, address and email have all seen a substantial drop over the last six months in the number of consumers who say they will provide this information across all scenarios.

By contrast, there is an increased willingness to provide data that used to be considered hard to get, such as •telephone number and date of birth. Both of these have seen rises in the number of consumers who will provide this information compared to six months ago (although it is still only a minority who will share this data).

Financial data, such as bank details or credit card numbers, can be obtained, provided the context is appropriate •- consumers are becoming more used to sharing this information in order to access content and services. Marketers therefore need to be more conscious of the reasons they provide when asking for information.



Key Points

Wording of privacy statements can make a 12 point difference in the level of opt-out, although there is less variation between wordings than was found six months ago. The majority of consumers still say they will opt out at the initial point of data capture, presenting a challenge for permission-to-market rates.

Requests to unsubscribe are a fact of life for marketers, but there is scope to reduce their rate through greater relevance, more restraint in contact frequency and better targeting - all major causes for a consumer to ask for communications to stop.

Marketers appear to be getting better in the way they use data, leading to a lower level of unsubscribe requests than six months ago. The things that most offend consumers all gained less comment than before, with one exception - six out of ten still claim they did not give their permission for marketing in the first place. That level of non-compliance seems unlikely, yet it means marketing needs to work harder to communicate where it got the individual’s data and why it is being used.

Consumers have also become more likely to open items, even if they contain a data error, and less likely to just unsubscribe. While encouraging for marketers in terms of getting their messages noticed, it does not excuse the initial data flaws.

12.Would You Tick This Box to Opt Out? (Wave 3)

3. Consumers exercise the option

0

25

50

75

100

Option A Option B Option C Option D

57464645

43

545455

Would you tick this box to opt out?

Yes (%) No (%)



If you read the following statement regarding the use of your data, would you tick the box? Please assume that this is from a household name company with whom you are making your first purchase.

Please tick the box if you would prefer not to receive the latest special offers, promotions and product information from The ABC Household Name Company.

The ABC Household Name Company would like to keep you up to date with special offers about our bespoke holidays. We will also share your data with our carefully selected partners who will also send you marketing messages. Please tick here if you do not want to receive these messages

We’re sure you won’t be disappointed with the messages we’ll send you (and we’ll make it easy for you to change your mind later on if you no longer find our offers and promotions useful) but please tick the box if you would really prefer not to receive the latest special offers, promotions and product information from The ABC Household Name Company

The ABC Household Name Company would like to keep you up to date with special offers about our bespoke holidays. Please tick here if you would prefer not to receive these messages from us. We will also share your data with our carefully selected partners who will also send you marketing messages but if you do not want to receive these messages please tick here

Apr 2011 Option A Option B Option C Option D

Yes (%) 55 54 54 43

No (%) 45 46 46 57

Differences in tone of voice and transparency about how data will be used have a relatively limited effect on the opt out rate in three out of four cases. Between the highest and the lowest level of opt out there is a 12 per cent difference, however, indicating that marketers can benefit from careful testing of their privacy statements.

It is notable that one of the privacy statements explaining clearly that data will be shared with third parties(Option D) attracted the lowest level of opt out. One inference might be that consumers want to be able to exercise this option, but do not necessarily do so when it is offered.

Marketers can be encouraged by the sizeable minority of consumers who say they would not tick any of the options provided. Even so, it must be recognised that the majority overall are likely to opt out.



13.Would You Tick This Box to Opt Out? (Wave 3 vWave 2)

If you read the following statement regarding the use of your data, would you tick the box? Please assume that this is from a household name company with whom you are making your first purchase.


Yes (April 11) 55 54 54 43

Yes (Sept 10) 61 68 55 51

Opt out rates for all four wordings have fallen over the last six months by up to 14 per cent. This biggest shift has seen an opt out rate of nearly seven out of ten consumers fall to just over half of those surveyed in April.

For the first time, one privacy statement (Option D) saw less than half of consumers choosing to opt out, a significant drop from previous waves of research in which opt out was the default choice for the majority.

One challenge this downshift in attitudes presents to marketers is knowing how to manage permission rates through the use of different wording and tone of voice. In the previous wave, this could deliver a difference of up to 17 points between the highest and lowest levels ticking that box. In the latest study, this has fallen to 12 points between best and worst performing variations.

0

25

50

75

100


5155

68

61

43

545455

Would you tick this box to opt out?

Yes (April 11) Yes (Sept 10)



14.What Makes You Unsubscribe? (Wave 3)

What makes you unsubscribe to stop you receiving any marketing communications from a company you have a relationship with?

Apr 2011

I no longer had use/need for their product/service 59

I didn’t give the company permission to contact me in the first place 58

Irrelevant communication 56

Over communication 50

It was poorly targeted and didn’t suit my needs 50

Poor customer services skills/poor experience 43

Unreliable 35

Price 28

No integrity 28

There wasn’t enough valuable information 22

They never go the extra mile 12

None of the above / not sure 10

Unsubscribe requests are not always about the consumer seeking pushback against marketing. For six out of ten •consumers, the reason may simply be reaching the end of their engagement or consumption lifecycle with the product or service.

More worryingly, a similar level of unsubscribe requests are driven by a belief that the consumer had not given •their permission originally. This level of negativity towards marketing is exacerbated by the way data is misused, either through a failure to apply it to drive relevance or by over-use. Complaints about these factors, alongside poor targeting, are a major drive of unsubscribes.

Other factors within marketing’s control can also affect unsubscribe rates, from the quality of the experience, •through to price, information provided and even how much effort the company puts into their interaction with the consumer. Improving on all of these would soften the level of requests to stop contact.

No longer use product/serviceDidn’t give permission

Irrelevant communicationOver communication

Poorly targetedPoor experience

UnreliablePrice

No integrityNot enough valuable information

Never go the extra mileNone of the above

0 15 30 45 60

1012

222828

3543

5050

565859

What makes you unsubscribe?

April 2011



15.What Makes You Unsubscribe? (Wave 3 Wave 2)

What makes you unsubscribe to stop you receiving any marketing communications from a company you have a relationship with?

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Irrelevant communication -7

I no longer had use/need for their product/service -6

It was poorly targeted and didn’t suit my needs -6

Over communication -5

There wasn’t enough valuable information -5

Poor customer services skills/poor experience -4

Unreliable -4

No integrity -3

They never go the extra mile -3

I didn’t give the company permission to contact me in the first place -1

Price 0

None of the above / not sure 1

Marketers would argue strongly that their use of personal information is fully compliant with the Data Protection •Act and relevant industry codes of practice. Consumers seem less convinced that this is the case.

Triggers for asking to unsubscribe are changing, however. Fewer consumers now say that irrelevant or poorly •targeted communications are the reason, compared to six months ago. Consumers are also less likely to say they are getting too many items and therefore choose to stop receiving them.

There has also been a fall in the number of consumers who immediately unsubscribe when they no longer need •or use a product or service. They have also become less sensitive to issues such as not receiving enough valuable information, having a poor experience or finding the company unreliable.

What makes you unsubscribe?

Irrelevant communicationNo longer use product/service

Poorly targetedOver communication

Not enough valuable informationPoor experience

UnreliableNo integrity

Never go the extra mileDidn’t give permission

PriceNone of the above

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2

10

-1-3-3-4-4-5-5-6-6-7

Wave 3 v Wave 2



16.Treatment of Poorly Targeted Items (Wave 3)

If you receive mail (post or email) incorrectly addressed (wrong name, mis-spelt, etc) or addressed to the occupier, do you tend to:

April 2011

Throw away without opening 27

Open and throw away 25

Mark as SPAM 16

Open and read 14

Unsubscribe 13

Call the company to ask them to stop sending mail 5

When an item arrives with a data error - either a wrong name, mis-spelling or no targeting - the communication is •wasted since just over a quarter of consumers do not even open the message. Marketers can not rely on subject lines or envelope outers to gain attention if the core data elements are not correct.

One quarter of these items do get opened, but are quickly disposed of. Taken together, that means data errors •will lead to just over half of all messages being thrown away or deleted.

More serious actions taken by consumers could lead to a decline in permission-to-market rates, since one in •seven consumers will unsubscribe. Brands may not even be aware that the target has responded badly if an email message gets marked as spam, up to the moment when an ISP downgrades their reputation and deliverability rates fall.

One in twenty consumers will take direct action over data errors and call a company to get onto its do not •contact list. This is a strongly negative outcome that can be relatively easily avoided through better data management.

Throw away without opening

Open and throw away

Mark as SPAM

Open and read

Unsubscribe

Call the company

0 10 20 30

5

13

14

16

25

27

Actions with incorrectly addressed items

April 2011



17.Treatment of Poorly Targeted Items (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

If you receive mail (post or email) incorrectly addressed (wrong name, mis-spelt, etc) or addressed to the occupier, do you tend to:

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Open and throw away 2

Open and read 2

Unsubscribe 2

Call the company to ask them to stop sending mail 0

Throw away without opening -2

Mark as SPAM -4

Treatment of items with data errors has changed slightly over the last six months. Consumers are slightly more •likely to open direct mail or email regardless of poor targeting or mis-spellings. At the same time, there has been a reduction in the proportion who simply discard these messages without looking at their contents. One explanation might be that consumers have become accustomed to seeing data errors and are now less sensitive to them, so react less negatively now than before.

A paradox exists with regard to this changing consumer treatment, however, while more consumers in this wave •say they unsubscribe if the targeting data is wrong, there has been a more significant reduction in the proportion who just mark such messages as spam. Consumers seem to recognise that telling companies directly how they feel about a message is more effective than using an intermediary, such as an ISP’s spam filter, to do the job for them.

Actions with incorrectly addressed items

Open and throw away

Open and read

Unsubscribe

Call the company

Throw away without opening

Mark as SPAM

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2

-4

-2

0

2

2

2

Wave 3 v Wave 2



Key Points

Creating an online account may save time and effort for consumers, but they do not necessarily see that as a fair exchange for their personal details. Just under one quarter (23 per cent) will always create an account, while 21 per cent never do. Trust is a key factor for those who chose to sign up, but some consumers are wary of losing their log-in details.

The balance of power in the online information exchange is shifting away from brands and towards consumers. More access to information is leading a significant proportion of consumers to terminate interactions rather than provide their data. Required fields are also now avoided by one in five. Consumers do generally follow the rules - just 3 per cent always fill in false information. (This small group may have discovered that they can still get what they want online despite lying about who they are.)

Two-thirds of consumers in this wave of research said they now have multiple email addresses. Even so, one third of them have just two addresses, while one in five have three. Significant multiple email address usage (ie, five or more accounts) is limited to just 6 per cent of consumers in this sample.

While few consumers may be lying when they provide information online, the majority are manipulating the details they provide. Just over half (56 per cent) use an email address just when asked for it for marketing purposes, rather than giving out their main account. Where brands have migrated into digital campaigns and e-CRM programmes, the implication is that levels of engagement may not be as high as is assumed by the mere presence of an email address in a record.

18.Setting Up Accounts Online (Wave 3)

4. The savvy consumer gets wary

Only for brands I trust

After used a site a few times

Always set an account up

Never set an account up

Often lose username/password

0 1 2 3 4 5

2.77

2.78

2.84

3.38

3.72

Creating online accounts

Mean Score (5 = Strongly Agree)



Thinking about buying goods online, when you are offered the facility to set an account up so you don’t have to re-enter data the next time you use the site, please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following:April 2011 Strongly

agreeAgree Neutral Disagree Strongly

disagree

Only do this for brands I trust 21 44 27 4 2

Set an account up after I’ve used a site/company a few times

10 40 35 9 5

Never set an account up for future use

8 13 39 30 9

Always set an account up 6 17 43 24 9

Tend to set up an account but often lose the username/password details when I try and shop again

5 23 31 26 15

Trust is the key to consumers setting up accounts online, even if this can save them effort in re-entering their •personal data the next time they use the same site. Trusted brands are substantially more likely to see account creation by a factor of nearly 20 per cent.

Typical consumer behaviour is to create an account after several interactions with a specific site - this is more •common behaviour than automatically creating an account. But while one quarter of consumers say they always sign up in this way, one-third do not.

On the other side of this behaviour, one in five consumers never create accounts. One obstacle may be the •potential to lose log-in details - 28 per cent of consumers say this tends to happen to them.

19.Behaviour Online When Asked to Provide Data (Wave 3)

Information exchange online

Mean Score (4 = Most likely)

Terminate the request

Provide all data required

Enter gibberish or false information

0 1 2 3 4

1.69

2.15

2.41



Thinking about a situation where you want to obtain information on the internet, but the website requires you to provide your personal details to do so, how likely would it be for you to:April 2011 Always Frequently Sometimes Never

Terminate the request and find another way to get the information

12 27 51 10

Provide all data marked as "required" in the form

8 19 53 20

Enter in gibberish or false information, just to fill in the fields

3 8 44 45

A new behaviour is emerging among consumers searching for information online - one in eight will always end •a transaction rather than provide their personal data, with just over one quarter frequently taking this course of action. Competition and commoditisation of services suggests many consumers believe they can get the information or service they want without taking part in any exchange.

Consumers are also becoming resistant to routine data requests - only 27 per cent will always or frequently •provide information that is required in order to get information online. This is offset by one in five who never provide personal details in this way.

An upside for marketers is that, while consumers might avoid providing their data, few resort to faking details •during information requests. A small minority admit to doing this every time while 45 per cent would never consider this course of action. Marketers need to prepare for an online world in which they struggle to get personal information, but where the data they do acquire is usually accurate and true.

20.Number of Email Accounts Used (Wave 3)

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5+

64

20

3535

No of email addresses

April 2011



How many email addresses do you have (including work and personal)?

April 2011

1 35

2 35

3 20

4 4

5+ 6

Multiple email accounts are now a fact of life for two thirds of consumers, when considering both their personal •and work accounts. Despite this proliferation, however, just over one third still have a single email address.

This multiple account usage is not as extensive as might be assumed. Having two accounts is reported by just •over on third of consumers - a combination of work and personal accounts will easily create this situation.

While one in five consumers have three email addresses, only on in ten hold four or more. At the upper end of •multiple account holding, a small group of consumers have five or more addresses they regularly use.

21.Treatment of Email Accounts (Wave 3)

Treatment of different email accountsApril 2011 Strongly

agreeAgree Neutral Disagree Strongly

disagree

I check all of them regularly 40 31 15 11 3

I tend to use at least one to give to companies/websites when I don’t want to give away my main email address

24 32 24 16 5

I have some that only get checked every now and them

11 24 17 27 21

Treatment of different email addresses

Check all regularly

One used to avoid giving main email address

Check some now and them

0 1 2 3 4 5

2.77

3.57

3.94

Mean Score (5 = Strongly Agree)



Most consumers check their email accounts as a matter of course, suggesting that marketers can generally rely •on getting their messages viewed (if delivered). A minority are less habitual in looking at their inboxes.

Despite this, over a third of consumers now have an email account that is checked infrequently. Although nearly •half of consumers are not behaving like this, the growth in the number of email addresses used is inevitably creating a degree of neglect for some accounts.

Savvy consumers have even gone a step further in managing their contact data - the majority (56 per cent) have •created an email account that they provide to companies instead of their main address. It is highly likely that these inboxes are the ones checked only every now and then. For marketers, this means that collecting an email address no longer guarantees being in contact with the individual.



Key Points

Consumers are generally taking the lead in protecting their own data interests, recognising their responsibilities and role ahead of brands. Government and regulatory bodies are not widely relied on to offer protection - a positive sign for self-regulatory initiatives such as those lead by the DMA.

Media coverage of data breaches has provoked concern among the majority of consumers. Even so, while half of those who express a fear have done something to mitigate any risk, an identical number have not. This wait and see attitude can be taken as much as an expression of trust as a potentially dangerous belief that all will be well, even though experience suggests it may not.

Over the last six months, there has been a steady shift towards a more active consideration by consumers of what they can do to protect their data, such as submitting a Subject Access Request. Fewer consumers are now willing to remain passive in the face of potential dangers.

Document management by consumers is commonplace, while use of commercial data protection services (credit checking, identity theft monitoring) is rising. These services will suit a proportion of the population, but are still resisted by others.

22.Who Is Responsible For Looking After Personal Data? (Wave 3)

Who do you think is responsible for looking after consumer interests when it comes to your personal data?

April 2011

Individuals themselves 39

Companies/organisations 33

The government 14

Information Commissioner 8

Trade bodies 5

5. Consumers protecting their data

Individuals themselves

Companies/organisations

The government

Information Commissioner

Trade bodies

0 10 20 30 40

5

8

14

33

39

Responsibility for data

April 2011



Data is not just about the person - it belongs to the person. Four out of ten consumers recognise this and take •direct responsibility for looking after their own data interests. This is a boon for the argument that self-regulation by marketers and personal responsibility among consumers are effective approaches, rather than more legislation.

Brands can not rely on this sense of ownership since one third look to them to take responsibility for personal •data. In many respects this is a vote of confidence in companies and an indication of the trust which they have built among this segment of the population.

Public sector bodies and industry associations are not generally viewed as leading the charge to protect the •individual’s interests - even the Information Commissioner is only named by under one in ten consumers. This reflects a sense of data as a commercial issue, rather than something for the public sector to manage on behalf of the consumer

23.Who Is Responsible For Looking After Personal Data? (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Who do you think is responsible for looking after consumer interests when it comes to your personal data?

Wave 3 v Wave 2

Companies/organisations 2

Trade bodies 1

The government 0

Information Commissioner -2

Individuals themselves -2

Consumers are increasingly looking to the companies who collect personal data to be responsible for protecting •their interests. This is significant for the data industry because it reflects the legal position (the company which collects personal information has a duty of care to look after it securely, maintain its accuracy and meet the consumer’s legal rights). It means individuals are more likely now to start by looking in the right place - companies holding their data - if they have a complaint or enquiry about it.

Some consumers have drifted away from viewing themselves as having the main responsibility for looking •after data, perhaps in response to large-scale data breaches that put control of data beyond the individual.

Companies/organisations

Trade bodies

The government

Information Commissioner

Individuals themselves

-2 -1 0 1 2

-2

-2

0

1

2

Responsibility for data

Wave 3 v Wave 2



Significantly, there has been a similar reduction in the number viewing the Information Commissioner as having the main responsibility. (Given the sample size, however, these shifts may not represent a long-term trend.)

24.Concerns About Personal Data Security (Wave 3)

Are you concerned about the security of your personal data?April 2011

Yes and take proactive measures (eg, have requested to see the data a company or organisation holds on me)

28

Yes but have never done anything proactive in terms of monitoring

28

It’s something I probably should be more concerned about

22

Not something I think about too much 14

No not at all 8

Concern does not automatically translate into action when it comes to acting on data security. One group of •worried consumers is proactive in ensuring the security of their personal data. But the group who are worried, yet do nothing is identical in size. This could indicate a latent potential for uptake of services that provide reassurance and impact management in the event of a data security breach.

Despite the high levels of media coverage of data breaches, 44 per cent of consumers are either unconcerned •or are somewhat laissez faire towards data security. While this group will not be actively seeking to gain better control of their data, neither will they be taking the best care to protect their own interests and could put themselves at risk as a result.

Concerned about data security

Yes and take proactive measures

Yes but never done anything proactive

Probably should be more concerned

Not something think about

Not at all

0 10 20 30

8

14

22

28

28

April 2011



25.Concerns About Personal Data Security (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Are you concerned about the security of your personal data?Wave 3 v Wave 2

Yes and take proactive measures (eg, have requested to see the data a company or organisation holds on me)

5

No not at all 3

Not something I think about too much -1

Yes but have never done anything proactive in terms of monitoring

-3

It’s something I probably should be more concerned about

-4

Active steps to protect personal data are on the increase, with a sizeable jump over the last six months in •the number of consumers taking a proactive step, such as submitting a Subject Access Request. If this trend continues, it will put more onus on companies to be transparent and accessible in responding to consumer concerns.

Aligning with this trend, fewer consumers are worried without taking any action, and fewer have yet to become •concerned about the security of their data. That may gradually translate into a greater demand for reassurance from brands and also higher usage rates for commercial services if these groups do become more anxious and active.

Yes and take proactive measures

Not at all

Not something think about

Yes but never done anything proactive

Probably should be more concerned

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5

-4

-3

-1

3

5

Concerned about data security

Wave 3 v Wave 2



26.Steps Taken To Protect Personal Information (Wave 3)

Thinking about protecting your personal information, do you do/would you consider any of the following:April 2011 Currently doing Would consider

doingWould not do

Check your bank and credit statements regularly for unfamiliar transactions

84 11 5

Store in a safe place any documents carrying your personal details (eg, passport, driving licence)

81 14 5

Shred or destroy personal documents you are throwing away (eg, bills, bank/credit card statements)

81 13 5

Use a credit checking/identity theft monitoring service

24 49 27

Routine ways of protecting personal information are already commonplace, with eight out of ten consumers regularly checking their statements, shredding documents before disposing of them or storing documents safely. These are simple steps to take which have little or no cost to the consumer.

Adoption of more data-oriented services, such as credit checking or identity theft monitoring is evident, with one quarter of consumers already subscribing to these and half considering doing so. One quarter remain say they would not use these services, perhaps because they are unaware of the benefits.

Protecting personal information

Currently doing Would consider doing Would not do

Check statements for unfamiliar transactions

Store documents in a safe place

Shred or destroy documents throwing away

Use a monitoring service

0 25 50 75 100

27

5

5

5

49

13

14

11

24

81

81

84



27.Steps Taken To Protect Personal Information (Wave 3 v Wave 2)

Thinking about protecting your personal information, do you do/would you consider any of the following:Wave 3 v Wave 2 Currently doing Would consider

doingWould not do

Use a credit checking/identity theft monitoring service

1.6 -3.6 1.7

Store in a safe place any documents carrying your personal details (eg, passport, driving licence)

-5.8 2.3 3.2

Shred or destroy personal documents you are throwing away (eg, bills, bank/credit card statements)

-3.5 1 2.3

Check your bank and credit statements regularly for unfamiliar transactions

-5.8 2.2 3.3

Although data breaches, fraud and identity theft have had a high profile recently, consumers have paradoxically •shown less likelihood to look after valuable documents or to monitor their financial statements. In the last six months, there has been a near 6 per cent reduction in the numbers who check their statements, store documents or shred them. However, consumers may just have other things to worry about or, since the recession has reduced their spending, do not need to check their statements so closely.

Commercial data protection services have seen a small rise in uptake, although there has been a similar rise in •the number of consumers saying they would not use these. These shifts do appear to be in contradiction to the expressed concerns about data security and may indicate lower levels of awareness of the options available, rather than any reluctance to use them.

Use a monitoring service

Shred or destroy documents throwing away

Store documents in a safe place

Check statements for unfamiliar transactions

-6.0 -4.5 -3.0 -1.5 0 1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0

3.3

3.2

2.3

1.7

2.2

2.3

1.0

-3.6

-5.8

-5.8

-3.5

1.6

Protecting personal information

Currently doing Would consider doing Would not do



The DMA UK is the largest trade association in the marketing communications sector, with over 900 corporate members. The DMA’s mission is to maximise value for members, whilst maintaining and enhancing consumer trust and confidence in the direct marketing industry. DMA members benefit from added protection, intelligence and growth, which together we call the Power of Association. Within these three areas, DMA member services include government lobbying, free legal advice, training & development, representation on DMA Councils, networking opportunities, regular updates of current dm issues/legislation, research, use of the DMA logo, promotion of member companies and discounts on a range of dm products/services. For further information please visit www.dma.org.uk. These benefits include access to all DMA research, including the full version of this report. For details of other research available, please visit www.dma.org.uk/toolkit. For details on the benefits of becoming a DMA member please call 020 7291 3388 to speak to the membership team, email [email protected], or visit http://www.dma.org.uk/content/membership.

The DMA

http://www.dma.org.uk/

http://www.dma.org.uk/toolkit



fast.MAP is an insight partner that continuously connects clients in real-time with their customers.

As exclusive insight partner to the DMA, we run a number of tracking studies designed to give DMA members primary insight into key areas that support the Direct Marketing discipline.

The combined experience of our Directors spans many industries, disciplines and methodologies and the solutions we provide can be executed from within the business.

Industry expertise: Financial, Automotive, Travel/Transport, Charity, Marketing Communications, Media, IT/Technology, Retail, Pharmaceutical, Travel/Transport, FMCG and more

Methodologies: Quantitative: online, telephone and face to face; Qualitative: in-depth interviews and online focus groups

Our aim is to help clients to:

Improve Marketing Effectiveness:

Branding Studies•Concept Testing•Message/Copy Testing - ads (TV, Press), leaflets, direct mail•

Understand Markets:

Demand Estimation and Sizing/Audits•Market Segmentation and Pricing•Competitor Analysis•

Understand Consumers:

Attitude and Usage Research•Customer Profiling•Customer Loyalty and Satisfaction•

For further information visit www.fastmap.com or call Paul Seabrook on 0207 242 0702 ([email protected])

Partners





http://www.fastmap.com

mailto:[email protected]



We’re passionate about data. Driven to help you understand it. To get beneath the skin of it. And put you at the heart of it. We listen to the things you want to achieve and the decisions you need to make. And, through intelligent conversation, we find ways to help you reach your goals.We lead the way in turning consumer and business data into marketing intelligence. We innovate to make managing your data easier and provide solutions that give you a competitive edge. We’re as much about understanding your individual needs as we are about analysing facts, figures and profiles. Above all, we’re about putting you at the heart of data intelligence.

Through our clear customer focus, we are a committed and trusted provider of Marketing, Credit Risk and Fraud Prevention solutions that empower business. Equifax is a global leader in turning information into intelligence.

Marketers and lenders alike work in partnership with us to gain a better understanding of their customers, and to target and acquire prospects more effectively. Our enriched data intelligence takes the guesswork out of delivering more profitable marketing activity.

Informed marketers. Enriched intelligence. Empowered campaigns.Invite Equifax into the heart of your organisation.

Visit www.equifax.co.uk

Communisis is a UK industry-leading marketing services provider. We work with many of the UK’s best known brands, helping them communicate with their customers in a more engaging and profitable way. Today’s communications are converging so we’ve bought together each stage of the communications life-cycle, joined it all up, from data and analysis, strategy and creative, right through to the distribution and response analysis of highly personalised online and printed communications.

Our data intelligence services include a market-leading data processing platform coupled with access to the most comprehensive independent datasets, enabling us to deliver truly optimal data solutions. We help our clients understand, acquire and retain valuable customers through data hygiene, enhancement and risk and marketing analysis. If you’re interested in finding out more about how we can help you communicate more effectively and profitably visit us at www.communisis.com

http://www.equifax.co.uk

http://www.communisis.com



The Data Tracking Study is published by The Direct Marketing Association (UK) Ltd Copyright © Direct Marketing Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in a retrieval system of any nature, without the prior permission of the DMA (UK) Ltd except as permitted by the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and related legislation. Application for permission to reproduce all or part of the Copyright material shall be made to the DMA (UK) Ltd, DMA House, 70 Margaret Street, London, W1W 8SS.

Although the greatest care has been taken in the preparation and compilation of The Data Tracking Study, no liability or responsibility of any kind (to extent permitted by law), including responsibility for negligence is accepted by the DMA, its servants or agents. All information gathered is believed correct at April 2011. All corrections should be sent to the DMA for future editions.

Ordering copies of the full report:

DMA membersMembers can view the full report for free•LogontotheDMAWebsiteatwww.dma.org.uk•GotoToolkitandsearchfor‘DataTrackingStudy’inthekeywordsearchbox

Non DMA membersThe Data Tracking Study costs £100. Please contact Yashraj Jain on 020 7291 3359 or email [email protected]

Copyright and disclaimer

http://www.dma.org.uk

mailto:[email protected]

annual data tracking study - dma

Documents