Menu
Menu
Kiwis wary about sharing personal data via IoT and analytics

Kiwis wary about sharing personal data via IoT and analytics

They'll ask, ‘Is there a compelling enough reason for that organisation to capture this information about me?’, according to Unisys poll

Law enforcement, national security and serious medical conditions are considered acceptable justification, but customer loyalty programs and employee tracking are not – the impact on privacy outweighs the personal benefit.

Kiwis are selective about the circumstances in which they support sharing personal data with government agencies and businesses via the Internet of Things (IoT) – according to the 2017 Unisys Security Index.

The index is a global study that gauges the attitudes of consumers on a wide range of security issues.

The 2017 study examined how willing Kiwis are to share data with organisations via data analytics and IoT – where devices can send information to other devices or systems via the internet.

 Unisys says the New Zealand study polled 1,012 adults in April 2017.

The findings indicate that Kiwis will embrace IoT when they see a compelling reason such as personal safety and medical emergencies. But concerns about privacy and data security suggest they want to be able to control which organisations can access their data.

Most New Zealanders (74 per cent of respondents) support medical devices such as pacemakers or blood sugar sensors automatically transmitting significant changes to a patient’s doctor.

 Meanwhile, 70 per cent support the use of sensors in luggage to advise passengers at airports if their luggage has been unloaded and what carousel it will be on.

Yet many fewer New Zealanders (27 per cent) support using a smartwatch app to make payments, or a health insurer accessing fitness tracker data to determine a premium or reward customers for good behaviour (20 per cent).

“These findings highlight that when it comes to personal data, there is a very delicate balance between privacy, security and convenience – even for organisations generally trusted by the public,” says John Kendall, director of border and national security programs at Unisys, in a statement.

 “For example, people are happy to use their smartwatches to alert police to their location when they need help, but they don’t want police to freely access that data at any time – they want to control when they share their data.”

The study looks into the barriers to IoT acceptance and finds that New Zealanders who say they do not support various IoT applications, cited privacy and security concerns as key reasons.

 In particular, many say they would not support an IoT application if they do not see a compelling enough reason to share their data or if they do not want an organisation to have such data about them.

 Data security is the biggest barrier cited for not supporting a smartwatch payment app.

 Unisys says wearable biometrics technology that analyses human characteristics to confirm an identity or monitor critical medical data are part of the IoT phenomenon.

The survey finds the majority of New Zealanders support police or border security staff wearing facial recognition body cameras to identify criminals or terrorists who are on watchlists (78 per cent) or medical sensors transmitting significant changes to a patient’s doctor (75 per cent).

The survey results also showed that fingerprint scans on smartwatches could address security concerns around payment apps.

 “Approximately half of Kiwis (51 per cent) support a fingerprint scan to control access to data on a smartwatch or to authorise a payment from the smartwatch (47 per cent), with support increasing with age. This is a clear signal to banks that biometrics could help alleviate consumer concerns about smartwatch payment channels,” says Richard Parker, vice president financial services, Unisys Asia Pacific.

While 49 per cent of New Zealanders support airline staff wearing facial recognition glasses to verify the identity of passengers boarding aircraft at airports, only 24 per cent support the same glasses being used to identify VIP customers for special treatment.

“Kiwis see it as a trade-off,” says John Kendall of Unisys.“‘Is there a compelling enough reason for that organisation to capture this information about me?’ The findings reveal law enforcement, national security and serious medical conditions are considered acceptable justification, but customer loyalty programs and employee tracking are not – the impact on privacy outweighs the personal benefit.”

The study finds support for analysis of data collected from a range of sources also varies – even among different government agencies. Fifty-seven per cent of New Zealanders support border security officers analysing the travel history of passengers, and those whom they are travelling with, to determine if they are eligible for fast-track border clearance.

If businesses cross the line and appear to invade customers’ privacy by revealing that they know more about them than what the customer has knowingly shared, it just turns the customer off.

Yet only 42 per cent support welfare agencies accessing personal spending data from credit card records and insurance policies to verify if benefit claims are legitimate. And even fewer (21 per cent) support the tax office using the same data to verify income tax returns.

Furthermore, the majority of New Zealanders do not support data analytics being used to sell goods and services to them.

Sixty-four per cent do not support banks monitoring individual customer spending behaviour to offer related products such as insurance for items they have purchased. And 62 per cent do not support shop assistants using facial recognition glasses to identify loyalty program members.

Parker explains that organisations that use data analytics must be sensitive to customer concerns.

 “Customers expect businesses to know them based on the history of their relationship. In a world where interactions may cross a range of channels and not just in person, many organisations are turning to data analytics to provide extra insight.

 “Ironically, while they may be trying to improve the customer experience, if businesses cross the line and appear to invade customers’ privacy by revealing that they know more about them than what the customer has knowingly shared, it just turns the customer off.

 “Technology alone is not enough; it must be used in the context of understanding human nature and cultural norms.”


Send news tips and comments to divina_paredes@idg.co.nz

Follow Divina Paredes on Twitter: @divinap

Follow CIO New Zealand on Twitter:@cio_nz

Sign up for CIO newsletters for regular updates on CIO news, views and events


 

Join the CIO New Zealand group on LinkedIn. The group is open to CIOs, IT Directors, COOs, CTOs and senior IT managers.

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags ethicsmarketingdataDXethics of big databig datacmoIoTprivacyunisysanalytics#SecurityIndexCDO#Unisys

More about CustomersTechnologyTwitter

Show Comments

Market Place