Forget Second Life, Local Government Group and YouGov Launch YouChoose

Luci Penn, Managing Director of REaD UK

Move over Football Manager, Sims and Second Life, YouChoose is an online budget simulator that encourages members of the public to play at being a Council leader by engaging them in difficult budgetary decisions such as making cuts and efficiencies and identifying alternative income streams.

Councils are becoming increasingly inventive at engaging their constituents in discussions regarding where cuts should be made. YouChoose is an innovative way for councils to gain insight into what matters most to them.

Originally developed by London Borough of Redbridge to engage its citizens in the problems that could arise from a reduction to their budget, YouChoose is now freely available to all councils in England and Wales to support the impending cuts on local Government funding. Run as a pilot scheme with Redbridge, the software has had 1,300 responses to date, more details of which can be found on the Redbridge site http://www.redbridge.gov.uk/ under the heading Redbridge Conversation.2010.

In the name of research I decided to try my hand at managing Redbridge’s budget. In order to stay liquid Redbridge need to make a £25m cut to services whilst keeping the council tax increase under 5%. The first option asked me to shave, cut or increase spending in areas like Community Safety, Roads & Rubbish and Education & Social Care. Next, I was able to look at how staff and management are paid and consider initiatives where money could be generated such as increasing charges and outsourcing services.

Although I didn’t save my responses as I do not live in the area my choices were as follows: I cut refuse collections to fortnightly, closed an outdoor education facility, saved library closures and increased parking charges.

I certainly found the tool captivating and quite fun and would be keen to see my council introduce it. They would do well to consider the demographic profile of responders and gain engagement from other profiles in order to ensure a representative picture.

In the meantime, it’s back to my own budget planning!

Anyone for T&Cs?

Luci Penn, Managing Director of REaD UK

Intermediary marketing companies such as small agencies, mailing houses and unlicensed bureau are an integral part of the marketing mix these days and they play an important role, providing valuable and effective services to end users at competitive rates. In the course of their work, they may procure data and other services such as data cleansing and list rental from a licensed reseller, through online solutions or directly from a data supplier. In order to acquire the aforementioned collateral the intermediary organisation will generally sign up to the terms and conditions of the data owner and will undertake to pass on obligations to end users.

With mounting pressure regarding data compliance and in response to consumer concerns regarding the safety of their personal data, some data owners are insisting that all end users must also sign up to their terms and conditions. The question of whether a national T&Cs scheme needs to become an industry standard is now the subject of debate. Sceptics believe that such a scheme would be beset with problems ranging from logistics to legal issues, not to mention that it has the potential to block sales, and the ramifications for small to medium marketing companies could be catastrophic. However, despite all of these possible pitfalls there is a strong argument that increasing the reach of T&Cs to end users would minimise the increased risk of data related litigation and government legislation.

While there is not currently a market appetite for such a move, one thing I am certain of is that the debate will continue. In the meantime, sceptics and supporters will have to keep a watchful eye on the situation to see if the current provisions remain adequate.

Data Initiatives Money Pit

Luci Penn, Managing Director

You cannot fail to have noticed the previous Government's unbridled attraction to data. Personal data, including its collection, digitisation, sharing and/or usage, has driven many costly projects at the expense of our privacy.

Often their objectives are well-intentioned, but the repeated disregard for an individual’s privacy has far outweighed the potential benefits. In fact, they could well nominate themselves for a Darwin Award www.darwinawards.com which celebrates those who accidently remove themselves from the species (in this case office) through ill-conceived (or idiotic) actions. But at least they’d win something!

The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Report – Database State (www.jrrt.org.uk/uploads/database-state.pdf) illustrates this by citing 11 data related initiatives as being “almost certainly illegal” with a further 29 as having “significant problems, and may be unlawful”. Whilst development on the £224m ContactPoint (database of every child in the UK) continued despite a Deloitte & Touche report indicating that the highly sensitive information contained within it could never be secure.

The laissez-faire attitude continued when the infamous clause 152 slipped into a draft of the Coroners & Justice Bill which seemingly attempted to allow Government to obtain and use data as they pleased regardless of the Data Protection Act.

Let’s hope that the Conservatives and Lib Dem coalition government continues with its intentions to halt this fast-paced data affair by scrapping many initiatives developed or in development by Labour.

Initiatives such as ID Cards, National Identity Register, and ContactPoint were all earmarked to be abandoned, despite having cost several billions of pounds to date. It remains to be seen whether these intentions remain on the political agenda - there will certainly be huge backing for such moves.

However, I can’t help but feel a little miffed about the scale of the Investment thus far. As a nation we face the cold reality of a £164bn deficit and such initiatives (collectively running into billions themselves) have simply contributed to that debt. Let’s hope the new Government balances the drive for progress with a respect for our privacy before signing away money we don’t have.

DVLA: Slick Strategy?!

Richard Anderson,
Business Development Director

Ok. I confess. I hadn't realised the youthful photograph that adorns my driving licence is not good enough anymore being over 10-years-old. While it might not sound like terribly negligent behaviour on the surface, I had also forgotten to inform DVLA that I changed my address 2 1/2 years ago. So how did I find out the photo had expired? The irony is that DVLA have relocated me to my new address using a suppression file.

So is this a great example of database enhancement? The letter I received was a little Big Brother-esque in tone "The photo on your driving licence will expire shortly.... In preparing this letter DVLA has checked the last address you gave us with records held by a commercial partner". Very stern and a little disconcerting but it was reassuring to see the information was accurate.

After further reading it was clear that DVLA had already experienced issues with their suppression service as a caveat in the mailing states, "If the person we sent this letter to no longer lives at this address, please destroy this letter." My suspicion that DVLA had sent out two mailings at the same time was confirmed a few weeks later when the original letter, which had been set to my former address at exactly the same time as the other letter, arrived on my doormat. Surely, it would have been worth seeing if I responded at the first address before sending out the tester to my new address?

So, while the strategy employed by DVLA was pretty slick there are a couple of potential pitfalls I think it’s worth noting. First, the letter to my old address could have been opened by the current occupants, opening up the opportunities for identity fraud. The tone of the letter to my new address alludes to an all seeing eye, which is a real turn off. The letters weren't phased to allow any natural interaction with the "customer". And finally, relocation products are not 100% reliable so my details could have gone to the wrong house providing yet another fraud opp.

Ultimately, DVLA's objective to get in contact with me was achieved however, as a word of caution to those attempting to relocate lapsed customers, put yourself in the shoes of the intended recipient and invest time in getting the creative and message just right in order to avoid them feeling "found". A softly softly approach is more likely to give them an opportunity to reengage with you naturally.

Right, back to my passport renewal form. Mrs A won't be happy if we have to miss our next escape to the sun!

Labour Caught in New Data Scandal?

Luci Penn, Managing Director of REaD UK

So, the direct mail industry is making headline news again and this time the incumbent Government is responsible with their recent mail shot claiming NHS cancer treatments will be threatened under the Conservatives.

The mail shot, which was sent to 250,000 women, targeted individuals living in areas with higher incidences of cancer. However, concerns have been raised about how Labour were able to target the recipients so effectively fuelling fears that confidential data may have been used.

Labour maintains the data used was based on socio-demographic data but examples have been given where only one individual within a neighbourhood or similar group received the mailing – in these examples the individuals in question were present or past breast cancer patients.

Some argue it was inevitable that cancer sufferers received the mailing based on the law of averages particularly as the data was aimed at the group using anonymous demographic hospital statistics however; others say it is just too coincidental based on the only-one-in-neighbourhood occurrences.

If Government have used confidential information in this way it would indicate a complete lack of regard for the Data Protection Act, which far exceeds the magnitude of their historic data blunders such as the HMRC data loss.

Whatever the data source, you’d think that someone within Government would have given some thought to the potential risks of mailing “theoretical” cancer patients. Ultimately, telling a terminally ill cancer patient that their treatment could be at risk if the Conservatives win the election is insensitive to the extreme. It’s the kind of behaviour that fuels the fears people have of the widespread availability of their data and with the direct mailing industry, which makes it harder to highlight examples of best practice within the industry and the contribution we make to GDP.

With Labour planning to send 4.5m cards in the run up to the election to targeted groups such as pensioners and owners of small businesses, lets hope we don’t see any more irresponsible headlines.