GDPR // Ticketing System Readiness Series
How are leading systems responding to changes in EU Data Protection? In the latest in this series we take a look at Monad.
Monad supplies its web-based ticketing tools to small and medium sized venues across the UK, based in London, they have a strong focus on usability and smart design.
Monad have always championed permissions being post checkout, allowing customers to secure their tickets with minimal clicks, maximising conversion.
What we saw
We worked through many examples, seeing the web flow for customers, as well as operator interfaces within the Monad system. (these are actually almost identical to each other). Using a demo system, we also walked through creating new ‘marketing lists’ – which are the mechanism to store permissions in Monad.
Great to see
Monad effectively ‘freezes’ the text around permissions once permissions begin to be collected on that list. So, it is impossible to just change the label that appears to a customer or staff member from “I’m happy to receive show news” to “I’m happy to receive show and fundraising info” – this therefore allows staff to definitely show the exact wording displayed to a customer at time that consent was gained. A new list can of course be created with the new description, all new consents will be stored in that list, the original list is still there and can be used for segmentation. Existing users will be offered the chance to upgrade to the new consent statement on next purchase.
What we didn’t see ……. but is coming
At present it is not possible to see a customer’s audit trail from within the customer record itself – you must look at the log of the list itself to show a customer’s opt in and out. Also, the current system only shows leaving or entering a list, not the channel or staff member who made the change. Ben Curthoys, the CEO, explained that this would be available very shortly. The other feature which is currently missing, but we would hope to see shortly is those around named third party permissions. Monad’s innovative ‘Folders’ way of dividing data, will allow individual or custom questions based on one (or many) factors. Permissions may be driven by promoter, performance space, performance, or membership status.
Transition Services and Issues
There are limited tools within Monad for customers to mass move data into new permissions structures. This is by design as Monad believes mass changes to customer permissions should really never be needed. Monad’s staff will be available to provide technical services should a reformatting or mass move of state
Issue to consider
Venues using Monad will need to consider how they will migrate users to a new third party consent system, particularly their choice of folder structures to trigger these questions. In addition to collecting these permissions, they must also examine their current consent label wording and decide if to begin using new, compliant text (if not already clear and unambiguous) to make sure all new data has been obtained in a compliant manner.
Stand out feature
Monad is one of very few systems who push marketing permissions and preferences to post transaction screens. This is a major shift in the transaction flow, but one that makes total sense. It allows very clear focus to be placed on ‘closing the sale’ – selling tickets, and then allowing clear and simple layout of permissions without a countdown clock scaring customers to rush through options. This methodology also allows customers to be reminded of their preferences on each transaction without having to dive off into ‘my account’
Monad still have some work to do to tidy up interfaces to allow clients to find exact permission opt-in times and places. Locating the marketing permissions post-transaction is a bold design decision, but it has been in place for many years, and there is no evidence that it has limited sign up. The ability of the company to move items through a streamlined development and deployment cycle helps them and their customers get access to the tools they need.
This article gives information in relation to what we consider to be best practice. However, compliance is context and fact sensitive and as such following any guidance does not guarantee regulatory or statutory compliance.
The Information Commissioners Office will judge any complaint on its own merits, and organisations in need of context or situation specific legal advice should seek it from an appropriately qualified source.
This work has been made possible by support from Arts Council England