You’ve seen it before: the long form you must sign before partaking in a potentially dangerous activity, the checkbox at the bottom of an end-user license agreement before you can use a new piece of software, and the abundant documents that are part of every major monetary purchase.
These laborious practices are developed by corporations as reaction to a regulation, an issue or advice from a lawyer. Not surprisingly, associations are responding analogously to growing regulatory concerns such as ePrivacy, the General Data Protection Regulation and the California Consumer Privacy Act. To address the new regulations rapidly and efficiently, enterprises stick to the “science” side of consent collection while disregarding the “art” of the process. This is an important difference because customer consent is the crucial element that unlocks valuable conversation and insights that drive a more expressive exchange.
The ‘Science’ of Consent Collection
The technology, data and regulations surrounding the collection of data encompasses the “science of consent.” These components are well-defined, agreed across a company, heavily supervised, and can be eagerly reported both inside and outside the organization.
There is nothing characteristically wrong with viewing consent this way. However, by only approaching preference and consent management scientifically, enterprises are doing the bare minimum to comply with these regulations. A business simply adopting a technology doesn’t mean it fully considers customer and business needs or the intended spirit of the laws. A science-only attitude prevents organizations from benefiting from the best aspects of what consent management can offer.