Marketing Data: Do I Own My Own Name?

I’ve always been uncomfortable with the position taken by some privacy advocates that each of us owns our own information—and thus has some form of property rights derived from this information—and that marketers shouldn’t have use of that information without first having permission and providing compensation

I’ve always been uncomfortable with the position taken by some privacy advocates that each of us owns our own information—and thus has some form of property rights derived from this information—and that marketers shouldn’t have use of that information without first having permission and providing compensation. To this, I say—hey OK, but let’s be pragmatic.

Certainly, if I’m a celebrity, where my name and likeness has commercial value, perhaps as an endorsement, such an “ownership” rationale is a valid one.

But in the exchange of customer data for marketing purposes, this argument lacks merit, in my opinion. The value of my name on a mailing list, for example—mail, email, telephone, otherwise—has nothing to do with “my” name being on the list or, for that matter, “your” name being on that same list. (Even when we are both see ourselves as celebrities.)

Rather, the value of both our names being on the same list is by knowing the shared attribute that placed us both there—alongside the thousands of others on that list. In the world of response lists, it’s the sweat equity of the business where you and I both chose to become a customer that deserves the compensation in any data transaction, as it alone built the list by building a business where you and I both chose to become customers.

Yes, that marketer must provide notice, choice, security, sensitivity, marketing data for marketing use only, and perform other ethical obligations that are part of the self-regulatory process that have governed this business for nearly 50 years—recognizing that customer data is our most important asset, and that consumer trust and acceptance serves as the foundation of the data-driven marketing field. Privacy policies, preference centers, in-house suppressions and DMAchoice collectively serve the consumer empowerment process by enabling transparency and control in this data exchange.

In the world of compiled lists, where third parties assemble observed data for marketing purposes, again there is the sweat equity of the entities assembling and analyzing that data to “create” or “discover” the shared attributes of that data. Knowing these attributes is where the combined data derive their value. Marketers deploy activity based on these attributes to generate commerce. While the relationship between individuals and these third parties may be indirect, we still have the same ethical codes and opt-out tools governing the process. Recently, in the case of Acxiom, we’ve seen such a data compiler working to establish a direct relationship with consumers, providing individuals with the ability to inspect the data the company holds and to suggest corrections—as if the firm were a (highly regulated) credit bureau. (It is not.)

The fact that my name—Chet Dalzell—is on both response and compiled lists, to me, doesn’t entitle me to anything except to expect and demand that these movers of data act as responsible stewards of this information using well established ethics and self-regulatory methods. (Granted, in the US, there are legal requirements that must be met in such sensitive areas as credit, personal finance, health and children’s data.)

This flow of data, as the Direct Marketing Association most recently reaffirmed, generates huge social and economic value—and, in my view, my own participation as a customer in the marketplace is my agreement to allow such data exchange to happen. In fact, were it not for such flows, I might never have been provided an opportunity to become a customer in the first place. Benefits to consumers accumulate, while harm is nowhere part of the marketing ecosystem—other than to protect from identity theft and fraud. I find it fascinating some would-be regulators fail to grasp this truth.

That’s why inflexible government regulations—and opt-in-only regimes—and technology strictures that interfere with my interaction with brands are so troublesome. Such restrictions may claim to be about privacy; more often than not, they’re really motivated by political grand-standing, anti-competitive business models, and the forced building of new data siloes that do nothing to advance consumer protection—and potentially ruin data-driven marketing.

Yes, I own my name—and by choosing to be a customer of your brand, so do you own your customer list. Of course, I am the ultimate regulator in this process. For whim or reason, I can choose to take my business elsewhere.

Now, what about my Twitter, Facebook, Google and Yahoo! profiles?

When Companies Lose Customers …

United Parcel Service suffered staggering customer defection as a consequence of its 15-day Teamsters work stoppage in 1997. The result was that, even after their 80,000 drivers were back behind the wheels of their delivery trucks or tractor-trailers, many thousands of UPS workers were laid off. A UPS manager in Arkansas was quoted as saying: “To the degree that our customers come back will dictate whether those jobs come back.”

United Parcel Service suffered staggering customer defection as a consequence of its 15-day Teamsters work stoppage in 1997. The result was that, even after their 80,000 drivers were back behind the wheels of their delivery trucks or tractor-trailers, many thousands of UPS workers were laid off. A UPS manager in Arkansas was quoted as saying: “To the degree that our customers come back will dictate whether those jobs come back.”

The UPS loss was a gain for Federal Express, Airborne, RPS and even the United States Postal Service. They provided services during the strike that made UPS’ customers see the dangers of using a single delivery company to handle their packages and parcels. FedEx, for example, reported expecting to keep as much as 25 percent of the 850,000 additional packages it delivered each day of the strike.

UPS’ customer loss woes and the impact on its employees was a very public display of the consequences of customer turnover. Most customer loss is relatively unseen, but it has been determined that many companies lose between 10 percent and 40 percent of their customers each year. Still more customers fall into a level of dormancy, or reduced “share of customer” with their current supplier, moving their business to other companies, thus decreasing the amount they spend with the original supplier. The economic impact on companies, not to mention the crushing moral effect on employees—downsizing, rightsizing, plant closings, layoffs, etc.—are the real effects of customer loss.

Lost jobs and lost profits propelled UPS into an aggressive win-back mode as soon as the strike was settled. Customers began receiving phone calls from UPS officials assuring them that UPS was back in business, apologizing for the inconvenience and pledging that their former reliability had been restored. Drivers dropping by for pick-ups were cheerful and confident, and they reinforced that things were back to normal. UPS issued letters of apology and discount certificates to customers to further help heal the wounds and rebuild trust. And face-to-face meetings with customers large and small were initiated by UPS—all with the goal of getting the business back.

These win-back initiatives formed an important bridge of recovery back to the customer. And it worked. The actions, coupled with the company’s cost-effective services, continuing advances in shipping technology, and the dramatic growth of online shopping, enabled UPS to reinstate many laid off workers while increasing its profits a remarkable 87 percent in the year following the devastating strike.

UPS is hardly an isolated case. Protecting customer relationships in these uncertain times is a fact of life for every business. We’ve entered a new era of customer defection, where customer churn is reaching epidemic proportions and is wrecking businesses and lives along the way. It’s time to truly understand the consequences of customer loss and, in turn, apply proven win-back strategies to regain these valuable customers.

Nowhere are the effects of customer defection more visible than in the world of Internet and mobile commerce, where the opportunities for customer loss occur at warp speed. E-tailers and Web service companies are spending incredible sums of money to draw customers to their sites, and to modify their messages and images so that they are compatible and user-friendly on all devices. Because of this, relatively few of these companies, including many well-established sites, have turned a profit. Customer loss (and lack of recovery) is a key contributor. E-customers have proven to be a high-maintenance lot. They want value, and they want it fast. These customers show little tolerance for poor Web architecture and navigation, difficult to read pages, and outdated information or insufficient customer service. Expectations for user experience are very high, and rising rapidly.

Internet and mobile customers, to be sure, have some of the same value delivery needs as brick-and-mortar customers; but, they are also different from brick-and-mortar customers in many important and loyalty-leveraging respects. They are more demanding and require much more contact. They require multi-layer benefits, in the form of personalization, choice, customized experience, privacy, current information, competitive pricing and feedback. They want partnering and networking opportunities. When site download times are too long, order placement mechanisms too cumbersome, order acknowledgment too slow, or customer service too overwhelmed to respond in a timely fashion, online shoppers will quickly abandon their purchase transactions or not repeat them. Further, they are highly unlikely to return to a site which has caused negative experiences.

What’s more, the new communication channels also serve as a high-speed information pathway for negative customer opinion. If unhappy customers in the brick-and-mortar world usually express their displeasure to between two and 20 people, on the Internet, angry former customers have the opportunity to impact thousands more. There are now scores of sites offering similar negative messages about companies in many industries, and giving customers, and even former employees, a place to express grievances. It’s a new form of angry former customer sabotage, which adds to the economic and cultural effect of customer turnover.

For many of these sites, part of their charter is to help consumers find value; and, like us, they understand that customers will provide loyalty in exchange for value. They also recognize that the absence of value drives customer loss, and that insufficient or ineffective feedback handling processes can create high turnover. As one states: “The Internet is the most consumer-centric medium in history—and we will help consumers use it to their greatest personal advantage. We will increase the influence of individuals through networks of millions. We will raise the stakes for companies to respond. We will require companies to respect consumers’ choice, privacy and time, and will expose those that do not.” This may sound a bit like Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” but it does acknowledge the power of negative, as well as positive, customer feedback.

Some businesses seem minimally concerned about losing a customer; but the only thing worse than the loss of high value customers is neglecting the opportunity to win them back. When customer lifetime value is interrupted, it often makes both economic and cultural sense for the company to make an active, serious effort to recover them. This is true for both business-to-business and consumer products or services.

So how does a company defend itself against the perils of customer loss? The best plan, of course, is a proactive one that anticipates customer defection and works hard to lessen the risk. Companies need defection-proofing strategies, including intelligent gathering and application of customer data, the use of customer teams, creating employee loyalty, engagement and ambassadorship, and the basic strategy of targeting the right kind of customers in the first place. But in today’s hyper-competitive marketplace, no retention or relationship program is complete without a save and win-back component. There is mounting evidence that the probability of win-back success and the benefits surrounding it far outweigh the investment costs. Yet, most companies are largely unprepared to address this opportunity. It’s costing them dearly, and even driving them out of business.

Building and sustaining customer loyalty behavior is harder than ever before. Now is the time to put in place specific strategies and tools for winning back lost customers, saving customers on the brink of defection and making your company defection-proof.

4 Attribution Models in the Age of Big Data

For marketers, attribution is the Holy Grail. For those unfamiliar with the term, attribution means determining what marketing channel or budget was responsible for generating a particular action. Without proper attribution, it’s pretty darn difficult to perform any kind of meaningful ROI calculations on your marketing spend. In fact, I wrote another post about attribution earlier this year or so ago titled “The ‘A’ Word—Learn It, Love It, Live It!,” which pointed out that in today’s marketing world, attribution isn’t always what it’s cracked up to be.

For marketers, attribution is the Holy Grail. For those unfamiliar with the term, attribution means determining what marketing channel or budget was responsible for generating a particular action. Without proper attribution, it’s pretty darn difficult to perform any kind of meaningful ROI calculations on your marketing spend. In fact, I wrote another post about attribution earlier this year or so ago titled “The ‘A’ Word—Learn It, Love It, Live It!,” which pointed out that in today’s marketing world, attribution isn’t always what it’s cracked up to be.

Now it’s no secret that attribution analysis is rather difficult to perform in an age of proliferating media, multichannel customers and, drum roll … Big Data. Think about it, how do you gauge which marketing channel was responsible for generating a sale when a customer was sent and read an email, received a direct mail piece and visited a microsite, Googled the company name and found the homepage, but clicked on a sponsored link leading to a landing page, went to and Liked a Facebook page, became a follower on Twitter, tweeted about it to his friends … and ultimately made a purchase using an App on an iPhone. Which channel gets credit? Email, direct mail, organic SEO, mobile, social? All of them? None of them? Some of them? It’s enough to make your head spin.

Now enter Big Data. In this column, I’ve written extensively about the challenge to marketers posed by Big Data. I know, it’s the meme du jour … seems like you read about it everywhere you go these days. Basically, Big Data is the massive accumulation of information that’s taking place across organizations as they market and engage with their customers and prospects across an ever-expanding proliferation of channels.

As customers and prospects interact with firms across different channels, the data continue to pile up. It’s this deluge of information and how to make sense out of it that is being referred to as Big Data. But, as I’ve written before, Big Data is really the problem—not the solution, per se. The fact that organizations are collecting all of this information is great. It’s what they are doing (or not doing, as you’re about to see) with it that’s most important.

I recently read a study done by the Columbia Business School and the American Marketing Association titled “Marketing ROI in the Era of Big Data.” The study was a survey of 253 corporate marketing decision-makers, director-level and above, at large companies. The results were striking.

They found that 91 percent of senior corporate marketers believe that successful brands use customer data to drive marketing decisions. OK, fair enough … couldn’t agree more. But, among those who are collecting data, a measly 39 percent admit they’re actually unable to turn this information into actionable insight. Pretty surprising, huh?

That’s not all. A whopping 65 percent of marketers admitted that comparing the effectiveness of marketing across different digital media is “a major challenge” for their business. An astounding 57 percent of marketers are not basing their marketing budgets on any ROI analysis whatsoever. And to add insult to injury, 22 percent are using brand awareness as their sole measure to evaluate their marketing spend. That’s right, as their sole measure. A direct marketer by trade, I almost spit out my coffee when I read that last stat.

But the shocking thing is based on my experience, I do not find this to be out of the ordinary. In fact, I met with one client recently and was shocked to learn that the client had basically thrown in the towel when it come to defining attribution, and had created hyper-simplistic ROI analysis by using a control customer group to whom the client didn’t market at all, and compared how much this group bought against the rest. Sounds pretty wonky, right? The crazy part is that even the simplistic model is astronomically better than the 57 percent who don’t even bother with ROI in the first place.

So, what are some solutions to the attribution conundrum? Well, there are several popular models that marketers are experimenting with, and each one of course has its plusses and minuses.

1. First-click attribution—credits the channel where a customer first engaged with the firm. On the plus side, this model actually attempts to discern where the customer journey actually began. The downside is that in today’s environment where marketing is often run in silos, it can be challenging to track customer engagement in a multichannel manner.

2. Last-click attribution—credits the channel where the last action took place (i.e., where the conversion occurred). On the plus side, this model is super easy to track. The downside is that it only measures the channel that’s best at generating the sale itself, and completely disregards how the prospect was initially brought into the fold.

3. Equal-weighting attribution—tracks all of the touchpoints where the customer engaged with the firm, and gives them all equal weight in terms of generating the conversion. The advantage of this model is that it takes a holistic view of the customer-vendor relationship. At the same time, this model overlooks the disproportionate role one channel may play over another.

4. Custom-credit attribution—a hybrid model created by the marketer based on its marketing strategy, customer base, and so on. If done right, a custom model can be highly effective, as it’s designed based on facts on the ground. The only downside is, well, you’ve got to create and test it—which is often easier said than done!

Okay, guess I’m out of room for this post, so I’ll end it here. In any event, I’d love to hear about what if any attribution model you’re been using, how it has worked out, and so on. Let me know in your comments.

— Rio

No More Menial Jobs and 2 Other Steps to Customer Experience Transformation

As a marketing consultant, I read great articles about Customer Relationship Management (CRM) every day on the job. Most of them focus on the sales and marketing aspects of CRM … what strategies to employ, tools to use, messages to send out and so on. But let’s not forget that world-class CRM programs also include awesome customer service, essentially creating a Total Customer Experience that fosters long-term, profitable relationships with customers.

As a marketing consultant, I read great articles about Customer Relationship Management (CRM) every day on the job. Most of them focus on the sales and marketing aspects of CRM … what strategies to employ, tools to use, messages to send out and so on. But let’s not forget that world-class CRM programs also include awesome customer service, essentially creating a Total Customer Experience that fosters long-term, profitable relationships with customers.

For many companies, however, the customer service element in CRM is often an afterthought. Banished to a windowless office in the bowels of the company, customer service teams are quite literally out of sight, out of mind. Much of the time, this function is even outsourced entirely. But I have a sneaking suspicion things are going to change big time in coming years, and here’s why.

It’s no secret that companies are now dealing with super-informed, savvy and influential end-users who leverage Social Media and the vast research resources of Web 2.0 to make their purchase decisions. Let’s call this new end-user ‘Customer 2.0.’ In this new paradigm, the balance of power is shifting away from the sales and marketing teams, as firms are discovering that Customer 2.0s are by and large unresponsive to traditional sales and marketing tactics.

This means that customer service is, quite literally, becoming the first and only line of defense. If customer service is poor, it follows that the overall Customer Experience should be lousy, too. Given these facts, it shouldn’t be too controversial to suggest that in the business world of tomorrow, excellent customer service will not only the hallmark of a successful firm, but a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) by which success is measured.

Providing top-notch customer service necessitates transforming the way a firm does business and engages with its clients—aligning it to a model where customer service plays a central role in the firm’s operations. Welcome to the world of Customer Experience Transformation.

For customer service, I define Customer Experience Transformation in three broad swathes:

1. PersonnelIt’s time to view customer service as a profit center, not a cost center.

Say goodbye to the days in which customer service is viewed as a cost center, staffed with bottom-of-the barrel employees who can easily be replaced. To the contrary, customer-focused firms hire smart, savvy and highly motivated customer service representatives, knowing full well that these valuable employees are the firm’s principal ambassadors to the outside world.

I recently read an excellent article in Ad Age titled “Are You Ready for a World Without Menial Jobs?” The crux of the article is that instead of cutting costs, the world’s most successful retailers are actually investing heavily and spending for more than their rivals when it comes to recruiting, training and retaining customer service staff. Turns out, this steep up-front investment ends up paying off in spades down the road, in the form of higher sales and increased profitability.

2. SystemsWorld-class service needs world-class infrastructure supporting it.

Truth be told, customer support is only as good as the systems a firm has in place to support its operations. In the world of Customer 2.0, a Web presence acts as a primary point of engagement with customers. In that vein, it’s crucial to provide customers a Web presence that is not only clean, clutter-free and easy-to-navigate, but also—especially when it comes to providing personal or account info—personalized and secure. Furthermore, a website must be also optimized for ALL major Web browsers and operating systems, including—and especially—mobile.

In the age of Social Media, no firm that’s serious about providing customer service can avoid having a social media strategy. Without getting into a nuanced approach required for firm-wide Social Media engagement, as regards customer service, Social Media can and should be used to listen to, engage with and monitor a company’s customer base. There are some great SCRM (SocialCRM) and Social Media monitoring tools out there. Supported by savvy staff, they can be used to ensure customers are being engaged with quickly and effectively.

Internally facing, there are myriad important questions to ask, as well. Where are customer data stored, and how often is this database updated? How often are these data being synced with information from outlying systems, including IVRs, marketing tools, etc? What CRM solution is being used, and are best-practices being followed? If not, good luck tracking KPIs.

3. DNAChange the way you act, and you’ll change the way you’re perceived.

In many ways, corporate DNA is the most important element in Customer Experience Transformation. Corporate DNA is synonymous with corporate culture, which permeates the way in which an organization engages with its customers. For many companies—especially those in legacy industries—becoming customer-focused requires a major pivot.

To illustrate this point, let’s focus on the healthcare industry. Because in the US, health insurance is almost always procured by the employer, the primary point of engagement with end-users is usually when they call up to see why claims haven’t been paid. Now if you’ve never had healthcare in the US, you know this is most definitely not a pleasant experience. No wonder people don’t care for healthcare companies, in general.

Now, of course, denying and approving claims is far from the only thing that healthcare companies do. But, as a customer, you’d never know it. What this implies is an industry ripe for transformation.

If a healthcare company wants to be regarded as a healthcare company—as opposed to a health insurance company—then why not start by acting like one? Better yet, act like a health partner, providing customers with practical healthy lifestyle tips and ideas that will improve their health and, presumably, lead to fewer claims down the road.

Better yet, find out more about customers and send out highly personalized healthcare information they can use in their daily lives. Or, taking it a step farther, how about using that information to create fun contests and social media engagements customers can participate in, ‘gamifying’ the user experience.

In this model, although the business model has not changed, the overall customer experience has been transformed, resulting in a more positive brand perception, higher lifetime value and, of course, increased profitability.

Is your organization creating an awesome customer experience? If you have any questions or feedback, please let me know in your comments.

Thanks,

—Rio

Updating Your Marketing Database

It’s amazing how quickly things go obsolete these days. For those of us in the business of customer data, times and technologies have changed along with the times. Some has to do with the advent of new technologies; some of it has to do with changing expectations. Let’s take a look at how the landscape has changed and what it means for marketers.

It’s amazing how quickly things go obsolete these days. For those of us in the business of customer data, times and technologies have changed along with the times. Some has to do with the advent of new technologies; some of it has to do with changing expectations. Let’s take a look at how the landscape has changed and what it means for marketers.

For marketing departments, maintaining updating customer data has always been a major headache. One way to update data is by relying on sales team members to make the updates themselves as they go about their jobs. For lack of a better term, let’s call this method internal crowd-sourcing, and there are two reasons why it has its limitations.

The first reason is technology. Typically, customer data is stored in a data hub or data warehouse, which is usually a home-grown and oftentimes proprietary database built using one of many popular database architectures. Customer databases tend to be proprietary because each organization sells different products and services, to different types of firms, and consequently collects different data points. Additionally, customer databases are usually grown organically over many years, and as a result tend to contain disparate information, often collected from different sources during different timeframes, of varying degrees of accuracy.

It’s one thing having data stored in a data warehouse somewhere. It’s quite another altogether to give salespeople access to a portal where the edits can be made—that’s been the real challenge. The database essentially needs to be integrated with or housed in some kind of tool, such as an enterprise resource planning (ERP) software or customer relationship management (CRM) software that gives sales teams some capability to update customer records on the fly with front-end read/write/edit capabilities.

Cloud-based CRM technology (such as SalesForce.com) has grown by leaps and bounds in recent years to fill this gap. Unlike purpose-built customer databases, however, out-of-the-box cloud-based CRM tools are developed for a mass market, and without customizations contain only a limited set of standard data fields plus a finite set of “custom fields.” Without heavy customizations, in other words, data stored in a cloud-based CRM solution only contains a subset of a company’s customer data file, and is typically only used by salespeople and customer service reps. Moreover, data in the CRM is usually not connected to that of other business units like marketing or finance divisions who require a more complete data set to do their job.

The second challenge to internal crowd-sourcing has more to do with the very nature of salespeople themselves. Anyone who has worked in marketing knows firsthand that it’s a monumental challenge to get salespeople to update contact records on a regular basis—or do anything else, for that matter, that doesn’t involve generating revenue or commissions.

Not surprisingly, this gives marketers fits. Good luck sending our effective (and hopefully highly personalized) CRM campaigns if customer records are either out of date or flat out wrong. Anyone who has used Salesforce.com has seen that “Stay in Touch” function, which gives salespeople an easy and relatively painless method for scrubbing contact data by sending out an email to contacts in the database inviting them to “update” their contact details. The main problem with this tool is that it necessitates a correct email address in the first place.

Assuming your salespeople are diligently updating data in the CRM, another issue with this approach is it essentially limits your data updates to whatever the sales team happens to know or glean from each customer. It assumes, in other words, that your people are asking the right questions in the first place. If your salesperson does not ask a customer how many employees they have globally or at a particular location, it won’t get entered into the CRM. Nor, for that matter, will data on recent mergers and acquisitions or financial statements—unless your sales team is extremely inquisitive and is speaking with the right people in your customers’ organizations.

The other way to update customer data is to rely on a third-party data provider to do it for you—to cleanse, correct, append and replace the data on a regular basis. This process usually involves taking the entire database, uploading it to an FTP site somewhere. The database is then grabbed by the third party, who then works their magic on the file—comparing it against a central database that is presumably updated quite regularly—and then returning the file so it can be resubmitted and merged back into the database on the data hub or residing in the CRM.

Because this process involves technology, has a lot of moving parts and involves several steps, it’s generally set up as an automated process and allowed to run on a schedule. Moreover, because the process involves overwriting an entire database (even though it is automated) it requires having IT staff around to supervise the process in a best-case scenario, or jump in if something goes wrong and it blows up completely. Not surprisingly, because we’re dealing with large files, multiple stakeholders and room for technology meltdowns, most marketers tend to shy away from running a batch update more than once per month. Some even run them quarterly. Needless to say, given the current pace of change many feel that’s not frequent enough.

It’s interesting to note that not very long ago, sending database updates quarterly via FTP file dump was seen as state-of-the-art. Not any longer, you see, FTP is soooo 2005. What’s replaced FTP is what we call a “transactional” database update system. Unlike an FTP set-up, which requires physically transferring a file from one server and onto another, transactional data updates rely on an Application Programming Interface, or API, to get the data from one system to another.

For those of you unfamiliar with the term, an API is a pre-established set of rules that different software programs can use to communicate with each other. An apt analogy might be the way a User Interface (UI) facilitates interaction between humans and computers. Using an API, data can be updated in real time, either on a record-by-record basis or in bulk. If a Company A wants to update a record in their CRM with fresh data from Company B, for instance, all they need to do is transmit a unique identifier for the record in question over to Company B, who will then return the updated information to Company A using the API.

Perhaps the best part of the transactional update architecture is that it can be set up to connect with the data pretty much anywhere it resides—in a cloud-based CRM solution or on a purpose built data warehouse sitting in your data center. For those using a cloud-based solution, a huge advantage of this architecture is that once a data provider builds hooks into popular CRM solutions, there are usually no additional costs for integration and transactional updates can be initiated in bulk by the CRM administrator, or on a transaction-by-transaction basis by salespeople themselves. It’s quite literally plug and play.

For those with an on-site data hub, integrating with the transactional data provider is usually pretty straightforward as well, because most APIs not only rely on standard Web technology, but also come equipped with easy-to-follow API keys and instructions. Setting the integration, in other words, can usually be implemented by a small team in a short timeframe and for a surprisingly small budget. And once it’s set up, it will pretty much run on its own. Problem solved.