At the end of the day....

Sorry for the interruption to your service - just too much going on to get an update on here.

The afternoon session started off with a view from Claudia from CCF magazine on her view of outbound. CCF have been a champion of good practice in outbound contact centres for ages, so it was good to hear her point of view. It was also good to hear her mobile go off while she was on the platform (pesky outbound callers!)

Next up, John Price and Elaine Lee from the DMA’s Contact Centre Council gave an update on activity relating to the Telemarketing Manifesto. This is an initiative launched last year designed to encourage sustainablity and good practice in outbound for the four key stakeholders: Consumers, Companies, Regulators and Agents. (It’s great to see the emphasis on the agents for once. As Elaine pointed out, they are the ones that take the rejection, that make the great calls, that carry the responsibility for the brand). Elaine also covered the impending arrival of the DMA’s Telemarketing Best Practice Guidelines, to be launched soon (when they’ve got through the DMA’s Governance procedures).

Steve Smith of Brookmead Consulting then took us through some research from the TPS Report I mentioned earlier. This report was a pretty extensive piece of work covering a number of areas: The Consumer Experience of unwelcome calls, the impact of regulation on the industry, the regulatory process itself, the view from the US and a personal comment from Simon Roncoroni. Steve’s research, some hot off the press from Mori, gave some very interesting insights into the thoughts of consumers receiving outbound calls, as well as some strong comment from the industy on the regulatory process. More interesting was the industry futures section, where it is clear that genuine cold calling is really in decline and that mobile marketing, integrated web response and much more targeted ofers are the order of the day.

In the afternoon Jasminder from Ofcom gave some clarification around the Ofcom statement issued last September. I’ll write a separate post on this when I get a chance, but the upshot was some confirmation of the definitions relating to the abandoned call formula. It is quite technical, but very important to anybody running a dialler so watch out for my post tomorrow on the subject.

Finally George Kidd from the Direct Marketing Commission (and formerly PhonePayPlus and the Cabinet Office) gave an interesting talk about how to “love your regulator”, exploring themes around the increased longevity, sustainability and profitability that regulation can bring to markets.

So what conclusions can I draw from today?

Well there were two key themes, I think. Firstly, the ever present regulatory theme. There is work to be done by all operators on making sure they understand the September 2008 Ofcom statement and its implications for their businesses. For those using Answer Machine Detection (AMD), the implications are really quite significant in that they have to come up with a robust understanding of the number of silent calls their AMD makes and factor that into their dialler management to include it in their abandoned call rate. In many (if not most) circumstances, AMD is simply not a viable technology, certainly not where it is used all the time. For those not using AMD, exporing Ofcom’s clarification will be important. As I said, I’ll post on that issue tomorrow, but the DMA will work to get a statement that Ofcom can endorse on its website soon.

Secondly, the theme of best practice and on the importance of respecting consumers came through loud and clear. Good targeting is clearly the watchword (or maybe even watchwords...) for successful campaigns in the future rather than the high volume “Spray & Pray” activity we still sometimes see today.

This live blogging lark also turned out not quite to be as live as I’d hoped. Perhaps I’d better look into Twitter....

Lunchtime

Bit busy at lunch to write much, but a fascinating morning. Particularly the session by Simon Roncoroni on his personal vision of outbound.

The presentation on the use of automated messages by Steve Smith of Brookmead Consulting created a very interesting debate on the use of this technology. It's against the law for it to be used for marketing purposes, but the main worry is that if volumes increase it devalues the whole currency of th telephone a a medium.

Session starting - got to go.

Sustainable Future of Telemarketing

Well, I'm here. Safely ensconced at the Wellcome Collection, awaiting the arriva of the coffee trolley (due to a mixup with a timetable and my diary and the clock changing, I've broken the habit of the last 40 years and turned up unfashionably early).

The conference agenda is full an diverse - from the arcane technicalities of the inner workings of diallers to the future of the industry via some research, regulation and a debate on the merits of automated messages.

It kicks of with a session on AMD. This is the absurdly technical bit which was originally going to be part of a separate lab session. I pitty the poor delegates who are going to get me and Roland (the excellent Roland Smith from JAM IP) giving them their first dose of double maths for many a year...

Then the always excellent Simon Roncoroni will be giving his personal view on the future of telemarketing - made all the more credible and relevant by the fact that he's also responsible for such a lot of its past.

Then there's a panel debate on automated messages chaired by the incomparable Claudia Hathway of CCF magazine.

After lunch, Steve Smith of Brookmead Consulting will be launching the publication of a report produced for the TPS last year on the state of telemarketing (I ought to declare an interst - I wrote some if it) .

Then the DMA Contact Centre Council Chair John Price, aided and abetted by Elaine Lee qill launch the Best Practice Guidelines developed by the DMA Council.

Then after afternoon tea and cake, Jasminder Oberoi from Ofcom will issue some clarification around the Ofcom guidelines published in September last year and George Kidd from the DM Commission will round the day off with a talk on the profitability of compliance.

I will log on a lunchtime with a review of the morning. Meanwhile, forget the end of year / end of quarter / last day of winter / eve of pranks / last day in London before the G20 and either enjoy the session or do some work.

Speak later.

Sustainability in Telemarketing

Just a quick note to say I'll be at the DMA's event on the Sustainable Future of Telemarketing today and the Wellcome Collection in London. I'll be speaking on Answer Machine Detection (AMD) and the implications of the latest Ofcom Statement on Persistent Misuse. Hope to see a few people there.

I'm even going to try and post a coupleof updates while I'm there (not while I'm speaking of course - that would be rude...).

Trust and Trustibility

Doing the washing up on Thursday night I heard yet another story of a security breach involving an off-shore contact centre. The BBC (in the guise of The World Tonight) secretly recorded an undercover reporter buying “leads” with names, address & credit card details.

This is nothing new, of course, there was a Dispatches programme in 2006 that found evidence of data theft in UK as well as overseas contact centres, but it is a little depressing to know that it is still going on.

The problem isn’t limited to off-shore contact centres, of course. Earlier this month, a manager in a UK call centre (Barclaycard) stole £11,000 from a customer having stolen his details when he called in.

The fact is that credit card fraud happens. It happens in shops, pubs, petrol stations, ATM machines (that’s Cashpoints in English), restaurants and anywhere else people use plastic to pay for goods and services.

What’s more, occasionally bad people work in call centres. And in banks, newspaper publishing, restaurants, petrols stations, shops, pubs etc.

So why the interest? Why the undercover operation and top billing for a report that might be considered a bit “dog bites man”?

Well, I think there are a three things in play here.

Firstly, the brand on whose behalf the transaction was made and from which the details were subsequently stolen, was Symantec (marketing strap-line, "Confidence in a connected world") taking payments for the renewal of antivirus software. Antivirus software is surely something you need to think you can trust. It is also one of the few applications that regularly (well, every year or so) pops up and asks us to feed it with money. The thought that the software you installed to protect your computer and your data is actually inducing you to pass your credit card details on in order that they can be stolen is unsettling at best.

Secondly, it happened offshore. In these days of “British Jobs for British Workers”, a tendency towards protectionism in governments about the world and, let’s face it, a considerable lack of love towards the financial services sector, a good old-fashioned off-shore bashing session was definitely on the cards.

Thirdly, and perhaps more importantly, our details are now (despite what it might say in the papers) more secure than ever before. Chip & PIN has stopped the dodgy waiter from double-swiping your card at the back of the restaurant. Initiatives like the Payment Card Industry (PCI)’s Data Security Standards (DSS) have made businesses more aware than ever before that they need to protect data, from their staff as well as from external attack, protect their networks and be open about how they handle sensitive information.

So, what’s to be done. Over the web we have services like “Verified by Visa”, WorldPay & PayPal that give consumers confidence. We have Chip & PIN in face to face environments and a mattress to hide our worldly wealth in if we don’t trust the banks. Call centres are one of the few remaining situations where we still hand over our card details to an individual. How do we get the trust back?

Technology can have a part to play – the transfer to an automated system for the collection of the sensitive credit card information before passing the call back to an agent – has been used successfully. However, if you don’t trust the organisation you’re calling, how do you know that their IVR isn’t bent too?

Perhaps there is a scope for an IVR version of a “Verified by Visa” scheme, or perhaps a more public awareness of an accreditation like the PCI DSS. If this trust issue isn’t solved, it’s not only going to be overseas call centres that attract suspicion.

Ideas, anyone?