When consent isn’t consent
Ethics, privacy and customer trust have never been more important.
Organisations are beginning (just beginning) to grapple with the hard questions. They see greater trust as the pathway to greater customer access.
This is brilliant. We’re banking on it, literally. Yet although progress is being made, the market is full of gaps.
Take consent (based data sharing) for instance. What does it mean to you? Does consent give you control?
This came across our feed recently.
We reviewed it and here’s what we found…
- The ‘choice architecture’ favours the designer. This could well be considered manipulative design or a ‘dark pattern’. If you’re interested, here’s how to avoid doing this.
- Third parties aren’t disclosed. We recognise doing this may induce cognitive load, but effective design patterns can be put to good use here.
- This is not informed consent.
Don’t get us wrong, some of this is actually progress. People are being proactive. But the effort falls short. It certainly shouldn’t be celebrated as a success.
Why?
Because it reinforces a fundamentally broken model. This model has resulted in widespread distrust globally.
If we are to make progress towards a high-trust digital ecosystem where we maximise the value, meaning and engagement of data sharing activities, we’ve got to do more. We’ve got to design ‘effective’ experiences.
A big part of our work is focused on just that. In fact, our work consistently showcases;
- Comprehension of agreements increasing by 60%
- Time to Comprehension decreasing by 10x, and
- An up to 8x increase in people’s willingness to actively share data
If you’re grappling with these problems, get yourself a copy of our newest playbook.
Don’t just read, put the practices to the test. Build a body of evidence collaboratively with your customers and stakeholders. Change the game progressively.
If you need help, reach out to us.
