For me this is an easy answer. Consumers have little-to-no skin in the game with regard to data breaches (the Target data breach was the only exception, which was handled horribly, but even that pain was temporary — limits on debit card transactions).

Personalization always runs the risk of intrusiveness, and consumers have a LOT of skin in the game when it comes to privacy. When someone says something to me like “beacons are the new cookies” and i think about how freaked out some of my less tech-savvy friends are about re-targeting, it makes me think we are really out of touch.

I would dial back the re-targeting a LOT … which means more than letting consumers know your site is using cookies, presuming shoppers know the implications. It’s like a EULA — just something most people click through. So my vote is strongly on the side of personalized offers.

Security of personal information and financial assets are always going to be an important ingredient for success as retailers dive deeper into private label payment systems and the collection of shopper data.

The good news is that the supporting banks and the current credit system have been far from perfect in that regard, and shoppers will likely not see much more inherent risk in working with proprietary retailer systems than they do with Visa, Mastercard, Discover and AMEX.

With that said, retailers who want to play in this area should understand that it is incumbent upon them to invest in the latest and yet most shopper-centric security technology. Cutting corners here would be disastrous. It only takes one “Target” type security breach to wreck the ship and undermine consumer trust, yet it will takes months and even years to regain.

Trust and reputation are huge attributes that must be managed consistently. In addition, technology and touchpoints need to be consistent in the way they are delivered. In your example of the Phillips 66 pre-pay system, while technology speeds up the transaction safely, if the station itself is hard to get into and out of, if poor lighting or the neighborhood makes it too dangerous to get out of the car, or staff behind the glass wall are unpleasant, the best technology by itself won’t build trust.

Trust is irrelevant in the absence of risk. No risk, no need for trust. If you really want to work on building trust, rank-order a list of things that are risky — from the customer’s point of view. Begin in the parking lot (or the home page) and examine every customer touchpoint right through selection to purchase (include mobile pay, privacy issues, etc.) and beyond to returns, from a trust perspective. How risky is each touchpoint to the customer? Then, if you’re really serious about this, ask several customers in different demographics to rank the risks. I think you’ll find that we are defining risk and trust from OUR perspective, what WE think the customer thinks is risky. This article assumes the greatest risk for the customer is technology. That may not be so. The UX User Experience website notes: “our study revealed that participants felt there was little actual risk within their mobile commerce experience, regardless of true risk.” Of course that was in their own self-interest and they gave no actual data, but that… Read more »

Invasive and/or undisclosed tracking in retail via phone tracking or facial recognition, and anything that the customer isn’t allowed to initiate or asked to “opt in” will erode trust much faster than it can be built or rebuilt. Build trust by letting the consumer control the terms of engagement.

Trust and technology are related largely as a function of data collection, usage and yes, security. More than anything, customers are increasingly intolerant of brands collecting their data and failing to create value with that data.

As Gartner has eloquently stated: “Customers will not tolerate companies that have amnesia when it comes to remembering them and their preferences for recognition.

[They] …believe that they have a relationship with a provider once they have transacted with that provider…the experience should be mutually beneficial, and therefore designed with them in mind — similar to most relationships.”

The payback to customers for collecting their data has to be a better customer experience, more relevant communications and generally making customers feel that brands are paying attention to them. That all requires technology but more than anything, it requires leadership and customer commitment from brands.

I think anything involving a credit card often puts customers on high alert. This is mostly due to the constant news surrounding data breaches at retail stores.

I think the quickest way to build trust with consumers is to give them time, as paradoxical as that may seem. Ensure safe, secure databases and platforms — whether that is through the cloud or something else. As customers have pleasant experiences, word-of-mouth will do the rest.

Personalized offers need to be relevant and use data that consumers have given — knowingly given. A quick way for retailers or brands to appear sneaky or ill-intentioned is to use information about customers that was not clearly offered by the customers themselves.

Trust creates loyal customers — although this may seem obvious, technology and other trends are essentially useless to consumers without a foundation of trust.

Nothing could be impacted more by the trust-factor than digital wallets. The core business case of speed, convenience, security resonates with consumers, but how do consumers decide which of these apps to download and test?

Most consumers are not going to adopt and use multiple wallets on a regular basis. They may only try one or two. Downloading and trialing a payment app is unlike any other form of app that a mobile user will engage with.

The reputation of the brand offering the app, the breadth of acceptance at merchants, and ease of use all impact the trust factor.