The Bankwatch

Tracking the consumer evolution of financial services

Transaction hijacking – cheaper alternatives, at point of purchase

This article is about Google, but the underlying thread is interesting, and relevant for Banks. Just when you thought it would be great when customers could locate your bank/service/product using search, after your mammoth efforts at successful Search Engine Optimization (SEO) up pops a little helper to suggest your offer might not be the best.

Thats the promise of new technology from Autonomy, and inferred by Google.

Autonomy, the UK-based search company is also developing technology for “transaction hijacking”, which monitors when internet surfers are about to make a purchase online, and can suggest cheaper alternatives. Although such monitoring could raise privacy issues, Google stresses that the iGoogle and personalisation services are optional.

This just reminds me, that one approach, such as SEO, is never enough. Constant innovation within the internet space, and improvements to Customer Relationship Management (CRM) to incorporate online and especially email, is essential to ensure your customers want to think of you. I am not talking about spamming here. I am thinking of being proactive and appropriately re-active with customers at those moments of truth, to turn them into yourBank advocates.

Written by Colin Henderson

May 24, 2007 at 15:21

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The article you cite alludes to “privacy” issues, but if you ask me there’s a much deeper legal issue here.

    Imagine, if you will, someone lurking near the cash registers at Nordstrom’s, who pops out when a clerk is about to ring up a sale, and tells the customer she could get that handbag cheaper at the other end of the mall at Macy’s.

    How long do you think it would take for Security to toss this lurker out of the store? Less time than it took you to read that question.

    Conceptually, transaction hijacking is no different from the scenario I painted. It isn’t just a privacy violation, it’s trespassing and likely a whole host of other violations designed to prevent people from impeding commerce.

    rshevlin

    May 24, 2007 at 16:38


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: