The economics of digital identity

A research programme from The Economist Intelligence Unit
Sponsoredby
The
economics
of
digital
identity

© The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20151
The economics of digital identity
About this research 2
Risk and reward: Mastering identity in the digital economy 3
The rise of the digital economy 4
Hurdles in the race to digital 6
Preparing for a hyperconnected future 8
Winning by securing customer trust 10
Towards a true digital “fingerprint” 12
Appendix: Survey results 13
Contents
1
2
3
4
5
6

About this
research
The economics of digital identity assesses the role
identity plays in the digital economy. The report is
written by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)
and sponsored by Oracle.
The report is based on a survey of 201 IT
executives from North America, which was
conducted in February 2015. Respondents were
drawn from a range of industries, including 18%
from manufacturing and 14% each from financial
services and IT and technology. Of these, 55%
represent companies with up to US$1bn in annual
revenue, and 45% companies with US$1bn or
more.
The report also incorporates interviews with the
following experts and advisers:
James Ryan, managing partner, Litmus Logic
Ira Winkler, president, Information Systems
Security Association (ISSA) and Secure Mentem
Chris Hankin, professor of computing science and
director, Institute for Security Science and
Technology at Imperial College London
Stephen Bonner, partner, KPMG
The EIU would like to thank these interviewees
for their time and insight.
The report was written by Jessica Twentyman
and edited by Riva Richmond.

Welcome to the digital economy, where whole
industries are being fundamentally reshaped as
organisations scramble to build new business
models, tap new markets and create new sources of
competitive advantage. The dynamics of
digitisation that first emerged in industries such as
music and video can now be seen everywhere—
from the labour market, where jobs are matched to
freelance workers in real time, to the
manufacturing sector, where 3D designs can be
shared across the world in an instant.
By 2020, say analysts at US-based IT market
research company Gartner, more than 7bn people
worldwide will use over 35bn connected devices to
communicate, collaborate, negotiate and perform
transactions over web and mobile channels. Vast
legions already do so today—and for all of us, both
as consumers and employees, digital identity is our
passport to this online world of goods and services.
There will be winners and losers in this future of
all-enveloping digital connectivity. In the rush to
open up new digital channels, businesses cannot
afford to lose sight of the need to identify and
engage with individuals using a huge range of
mobile devices. Understanding and managing
digital identities is becoming critical because a
single view of an individual customer is the key to
knowing that person better and building a deeper
relationship with him or her.
“The opportunity here for businesses is vast. It’s
as big as the Internet itself. But the way that a vast
majority of businesses think about digital identity is
outmoded, outdated. They need to catch up,” says
James Ryan, a consultant and co-founder of Litmus
Logic, which advises large companies on their
security strategies, as well as the brains behind
several technical standards in digital identity.
“The market opportunity here is precisely this
huge because so many organisations are dealing
with the digital-identity management challenge
according to old ways of thinking. It’s the
organisations that can learn to look at digital
identity in new ways that will be the winners.”
But the risks are also immense, Mr Ryan
acknowledges. Those that handle digital-identity
data badly could trample customers’ privacy
concerns and potentially lose their loyalty. Those
that get it really wrong could leave digital-identity
data vulnerable to theft. Personal data, after all, are
as valuable to cybercriminals as they are to business.
“There have always been ways of verifying
people’s identity online. The problem is that there
are far more of these ways today than there ever have
been before—and that’s made the whole situation
more challenging, not just in terms of managing
digital identities but protecting them from hackers,”
says Ira Winkler, best-selling author and president of
the Information Systems Security Association (ISSA)
and Secure Mentem, a security consultancy.
The message is clear: companies must have a
well-considered approach to the use and
protection of these data in an age in which earning
customers’ trust—and not letting them down—is
essential to future prosperity.
Risk and reward: Mastering identity in
the digital economy1

According to a new survey of 201 senior executives
in North American companies, conducted by The
Economist Intelligence Unit and sponsored by
Oracle, the race to digital is well under way.
Almost two-thirds (64%) say digital channels
are highly important to their company’s revenue—
“mission critical” for 27% and “very important” for
37%. The strategic importance of digital will only
rise over time: In 2-3 years’ time digital platforms
will be highly important at 71% of the
organisations surveyed.
The challenge of managing digital identities is
not new to businesses. Trusted identity information
helped spearhead massive business and economic
transformation and growth during this young
century. E-commerce blossomed, for example, as
online shoppers became increasingly confident
about sharing their credit-card details online. But
it was not until around 2008 that digital identity
began to receive the widespread attention it now
commands, says Chris Hankin, professor of
computing science and director of the Institute for
Security Science and Technology at Imperial
College London.
“In a sense, this issue has been a bit of a slow
burner, but thanks to hyperconnectivity, it’s now
something that every organisation needs to deal
with,” he says.
Professor Hankin identifies 2008 as a tipping
point for two reasons: it was the year when
smartphones started to be manufactured in large
volumes (Apple’s second-generation 3G iPhone was
launched that year, quickly followed by wave after
wave of competing devices) and that social
networking site Facebook started to see adoption
rates skyrocket.
The rise of the digital economy
2
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit survey.
How important are digital platforms, such as the web, mobile, social media and Internet of
Things, to your company’s revenue now? And how important will they be in three years’ time?
(% respondents)
Chart 1. Digital channels will be “mission critical” to over one-third of companies in three years’ time
Now Three years’ time
Mission-critical, our primary revenue
channel(s) are digital leadership
Very important, digital channels are very
important, but not central, to our business
Moderately important, we use digital channels
but they are not very important to our business
Minimally important, we use digital channels but
they are not important to our business
Not at all important; digital channels are not at
all important or not used by our business
27
38
37
35
22
17
11
6
3
3

“As time went on, we started to see questions
raised about what data are being collected about
us—and by whom—and a wider discussion began
around some of the challenges that we’ll face as a
society as a result,” he says. “By around 2011 or
2012 it had become clear that, if collecting digital
information about people’s identity could provide
considerable commercial opportunities to
businesses, it might also be a point of concern for
the individuals concerned.”
Today, far richer digital-identity information
looks set to drive new opportunities and news ways
of working. Power is shifting dramatically in the
direction of the “owners” of that information and
opening the door to further disruptive
democratisation of markets, as younger, more agile
upstarts, such as on-demand transport company
Uber and peer-to-peer loans provider Lending Club
snatch business from older, more established
companies.
The overwhelming majority of respondents to the
EIU survey are already engaged in external business
activities that require them to manage digital
identities, including online commerce (68%), social
media (55%) and mobile commerce (44%).
But as Professor Hankin points out, they are also
increasingly aware of the responsibilities that data
stewardship entails.

The EIU survey shows that companies are well
aware of the responsibilities of holding digital
identities and are taking them seriously. When
asked to identify their company’s top three
digital-identity challenges, security is cited by
almost three-quarters (72%) of respondents,
followed by privacy (44%) and managing legal or
regulatory requirements (36%).
According to Mr Winkler of the ISSA, many
companies could be doing much more to prevent
costly security breaches. He is a great advocate of
security awareness training for both employees and
customers as a useful, inexpensive first step,
especially to promote secure password practices.
For now, executives seem confident about their
companies’ abilities to handle digital identities.
When it comes to managing the risks related to
identity—chiefly security, privacy and fraud—60%
of respondents rate their abilities as
“substantially” or “somewhat” ahead of their
peers. Likewise, 50% believe they are ahead of
their peers in collecting and managing digital-
identity data, while 47% believe themselves to be
leaders in using digital identity to cut costs.
But they should be wary of an “optimism bias”,
says Mr Ryan of Litmus Logic. “Everyone thinks
their chances of experiencing problems in these
areas are pretty [low], until a serious issue
demonstrates that they were, frankly, wrong about
that.”
Confidence levels are less high when it comes to
the use of digital identity for other purposes. Only
43% of respondents consider their organisations to
be above average in using digital identities to
enter new markets, while 17% consider themselves
below average. Similarly, in terms of monetising
the personal data they hold, only 39% rate
themselves as leaders, while 19% believe they lag
behind (see chart 2).
When asked how prepared they are to address
information security requirements involved in
storing and using digital identities, only 19% say
their organisations are “very well prepared”. Of the
remainder, 48% are “somewhat” well prepared,
and 26% are only “moderately” prepared.
There will be many more challenges ahead as
organisations seek to build secure experiences for
millions of customers who move continuously
between new digital channels and platforms. As
the Internet of Things (IoT) takes flight, whole
networks of smart products—from smart
lawnmowers to heart monitors to intelligent utility
meters—will start exchanging data, reporting on
their status and receiving instructions remotely.
At the same time, these smart products will also
give manufacturers and retailers a direct line of
insight into people, says Stephen Bonner, a
partner in information security at management
consultancy KPMG and former global head of
information risk management at financial services
company Barclays.
“Most of the focus today is on individuals and
their personal data, but increasingly digital
identity will need to be closely tied to their use and
Hurdles in the race to digital
3

ownership of smart products,” he says.
By 2020, analysts at IT research firm Gartner
reckon, there will be around 26bn devices installed
worldwide that are capable of these kinds of
machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. The
EIU survey, meanwhile, shows that 31% of
respondents say they are already engaged in IoT
activities requiring identity data, and a further
53% say they will be in the next three years.
But how safe will these data be? In February
2015 electronics giant Samsung caused a stir when
it issued a warning to customers against discussing
personal information in front of their smart
televisions. When its voice-activation feature is
switched on, a Samsung Smart TV can listen to what
is said and may share what it hears with Samsung
or third parties, the company said.1
Collecting and managing digital-identity data
Cutting costs by using digital identity
Managing risks related to identity (eg, security, privacy, fraud)
Monetising personal data
Using digital identity to enter new markets
Compared to your peers, rate your company’s level of digital-identity success.
(% respondents)
Substantially
above average
Somewhat
above average
Average/On par
with peers
Somewhat
below average
Substantially
below average
Chart 2. Respondents are most confident in their ability to manage identity risks
15 35 45 3 1
14 33 45 6 2
20 40 34 4 1
13 26 42 13 6
13 30 40 13 4
1. Samsung Global Privacy
Policy – SmartTV supplement,
Samsung, February 2015.

There is clearly much work still to be done. After
all, the ways in which companies can fruitfully use
digital-identity data are more complex than older
identity credentials such as credit and debit cards,
which primarily enable financial transactions and
tracking. Identity data will dictate individual
participation in a whole range of activities:
allowing homeowners to set the temperature on
their smart-home thermostat remotely; enabling
an automotive designer to view plans for next
year’s top-secret, high-profile vehicle launch; and
giving an energy company engineer access to
control systems in a nuclear power plant.
Given the new opportunities and risks, it is no
surprise that interest abounds in improving
digital-identity sophistication. Indeed, executives
anticipate a rise in activities—often complex
ones—that will require them to up their game. In
the future, manufacturers might sell customers the
right to 3D-print physical designs. Instead of just
shipping a product, the seller must now manage
usage rights, entitlements, subscriptions and
intellectual capital protection. This is an altogether
different and more complex set of capabilities than
making and shipping physical objects.
Right now, levels of confidence tend to be
higher when it comes to using digital identity in
internal processes. The majority of survey
respondents (55%) say they are using identity data
for research and development (R&D), with a further
26% planning to do so within one year. Meanwhile,
54% are using them for process automation (to
speed up transactions requiring identity data, for
example), with a further 31% preparing to do so in
the next year. Fifty-three percent use digital
identities for employee information-sharing or
collaboration and 50% to improve products or
services, while a further 27% and 29%,
respectively, plan to do so in the next year.
When it comes to product and service
personalisation, 44% use digital identities today,
and a further 32% will do so in the next year.
Exactly the same proportions use, or plan to use,
digital identities to deliver customer self-service
capabilities (see chart 3).
But strikingly, the question of using third-party
digital-identity data provokes a mixed response.
Many in the industry point to an emerging model,
where companies that already have an established
track record and reputation in managing digital
identities—banks, credit reference agencies and
social media companies, for example—create a new
business for themselves in offering to authenticate
users for other providers of online services.
“So, in order to log into my national tax
authority and file my annual return, I might use my
online-banking credentials,” explains KPMG’s Mr
Bonner. “It’s more convenient to me as a
consumer. It’s faster and more cost-efficient for
the organisation—in this case, the tax authority—
that needs to authenticate me. And it recoups the
money that my bank has already invested in
identity management, as well as creating a new
income stream for them. We’re starting to see the
Preparing for a hyperconnected future
4

beginning of an ecosystem around this idea of
digital identity as a brokered service.”
This concept of an “identity ecosystem” was at
the heart of a 2011 White House report, National
Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,2
according to Professor Hankin at Imperial College
London. Private companies, the report notes,
already use a variety of approaches to correctly
identify customers, most often with usernames and
passwords.
“The complexity of this approach is a burden to
individuals and it encourages behaviour—like the
reuse of passwords—that makes online fraud and
identity theft easier,” the report says. “Online
businesses are faced with ever-increasing costs for
managing customer accounts, the consequences of
online fraud and the loss of business that results
from individuals’ unwillingness to create yet
another account. Moreover, both businesses and
government are unable to offer many services
online, because they cannot effectively identify the
individuals with whom they interact.”
Whenever there’s a large-scale password breach,
notes Mr Bonner, “you absolutely see an uptick in
fraud at other organisations, because it invariably
turns out that customers are using the same
passwords across multiple services.”
The EIU survey shows that eight out of ten
respondents say their organisations currently use
at least one type of third-party identity provider for
customer and/or employee identification,
authorisation or validation, with the majority using
several different sources. Employee services
providers are cited most often, with 61% of
respondents saying their organisations use
providers of this sort. One-half use social media
providers, while identity assurance providers are
the least popular, cited by 44%.
But far fewer executives say their organisations
plan to use these third-party identity sources two
years from now and, for those who continue to do
so, provider diversity looks set to drop
considerably. First, three in ten will not use any
third-party identity providers in two years’ time,
compared with two in ten today. The projected
decrease in the use of third-party identity sources
is particularly noticeable when it comes to social
media and employee services companies, where
the number of respondents who expect their
companies to use these providers in the future
drops by half.
Furthermore, while most of the respondents
today use more than one source, when asked about
their expectations for the future, the vast majority
select just one option, suggesting that many
organisations crave a simpler, more coherent
approach to identity.
Process automation (eg, faster transactions that require identity)
Customer self-service
Product or service personalisation
Product or service improvements
Research and development
Employee information sharing or collaboration
Partner or supplier information sharing or collaboration
What internal business activities requiring identity data are you engaged in now or will be in the future?
(% respondents)
Engaged in now Preparing to do
within 1 year
Expect to do 2-3
years from now
No plans to do
Chart 3. Research and development and process automation are business activities involving identity data
that most respondents are engaged in today
54 31 6 8
44 32 12 12
44 32 12 12
50 29 13 8
54 26 9 10
53 27 11 8
41 35 14 10
2. National Strategy for
Trusted Identities in
Cyberspace, The White House,
April 2011.

There can be little doubt, however, that companies
understand the importance of earning customers’
trust when persuading them to share their personal
information with them.
Some digital-identity data are harder to acquire
than others. In our survey, 28% of executives say
their customers are “highly willing” to share
personal information, such as their name, contact
information and demographic details. Fewer say
they are so willing to share their likes and
preferences (23%) and location data (20%). When
asked to share details about their friends and
family or financial information, customer
willingness fades further. Only 14% of respondents
say their customers are highly willing to share this
kind of information.
Clearly, persistent customer sensitivities limit
the ability of companies to use customer
information for commercial advantage.
Customers are increasingly likely to ask: “Why do
you need to know that about me?” The onus is
obviously on organisations to respond with
strategies to win these reluctant customers over.
According to the survey, organisational tactics
for reassuring customers vary, as does the success
rate of these tactics. Explaining how data are
protected is the most popular, cited by 63% of
respondents, followed by providing transparency
on how data are used (49%) and explaining the
benefits for customers of sharing their data (39%).
However, proponents of providing explanations
about how data are protected are less convinced of
its effectiveness than those who choose
transparency about how data are used. When asked
to rank the effectiveness of these approaches, 25%
believe protection explanations are highly
effective, compared with 35% who believe
transparency is highly effective.
Winning by securing customer trust
5
Publishing a privacy policy
Asking customers to “opt-out” when sharing personal information (ie, data is collected unless customers indicate they do not want it collected)
Asking customers to “opt-in” when sharing personal information (ie, data is not collected without affirmative consent)
Providing privacy features (eg, Controls for selecting who can access their information)
Enabling customers to control their identity data (ie, ability to edit, correct or delete information)
How effective are these tools in allaying customers’ privacy concerns?
(% of adopters)
Highly effective Moderately effective Minimally effective Not effective at all
Chart 4. Enabling customers to control their identity data is the approach most likely to be seen as
“highly effective” at allaying privacy fears
30 52 17 1
36 57 7
32 54 14
36 55 9
48 41 11

“I think it’s fair to say that today’s consumers
are starting to have a more sophisticated sense of
the value of their personal data,” says Professor
Hankin. “They’re often willing to share it with a
company where there’s a clear benefit to them:
special offers, discounts, more personalised
services. But where there’s less perceived benefit
to them, they’re more likely to be wary.”
As far as privacy fears in particular are
concerned, the most common strategy is
publishing a privacy policy, selected by 60% of
respondents. Just under half provide customers
with opt-in or opt-out options that enable them to
either consent to or refuse data collection (47%)
and provide privacy features that enable customers
to control their information (46%).
Again, there is some disagreement as to the
effectiveness of these strategies. While 30% say
that publishing a privacy policy is highly effective,
18% think this kind of policy is only minimally
effective or not effective at all. Opt-out and opt-in
tools have more supporters—they are described as
“highly effective” by 36% and 32% of respondents,
respectively—and are described as ineffective by
only 7% and 14%, respectively (see chart 4).
Organisations should examine what works and
what does not and use what they learn to inform
future strategies, according to Mr Ryan of Litmus
Logic.
“Companies that put every customer in the same
bucket and assume they don’t know the value of their
identity” are courting trouble, he says. “Customers
are tired of being monetised without receiving value,
and companies need to be alive to that fact.”
“Every company should be closely monitoring
what it’s doing to retain the trust of customers in
terms of their digital identities,” he adds. “Trust is
the predecessor to leadership. You can’t lead anyone
without their trust. And you certainly can’t lead a
customer to a buying decision without their trust.”
As many as 80m current and former customers and
employees may have fallen victim to a recent data
breach at Anthem, a large US insurance company,
in which information including names, dates of
birth, social security numbers and income data
were stolen. Many of them could be vulnerable to
fraud for years to come and will have to stay ever
vigilant, IT security experts say.
This incident has reignited questions about
consumers’ rights to control their data and to insist
that companies with which they have ceased to do
business do not continue to hold them—rights that
few consumers enjoy today.
In Europe, the situation is perhaps most clearly
defined. Here, “data subjects” have the right under
the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive
to access all data a company holds on them, and
the right to demand the “rectification, deletion
or blocking of data” that they deem incomplete,
inaccurate or not processed in compliance with the
data protection rules.
These rights are expected to be reinforced
soon with the introduction of a new EU general
data protection regulation, which is currently
being drafted. In particular, article 17 of the draft
specifies a “right to be forgotten and to erasure”
and lists a number of reasons why a person—or
data subject—can demand the deletion of data
relating to them, including “the data is no longer
necessary for the purpose it was collected for” and
“the subject withdraws consent”.
The US, by contrast, has no single data
protection law, but rather a complex patchwork of
ad hoc industry-led regulations, based on a broad
consensus that their access to a consumer’s digital
footprint is key to unlocking economic growth.
Still, many companies are obliged to follow EU
rules when it comes to their European customers,
prompting complaints about increased difficulties
doing business in the region.
There seems little prospect of an end to this
debate. If anything, the gap between Europe and
America on this issue is widening, commentators
say.
Customer control and the “right to be forgotten”

Mastering digital identities can transform an
organisation’s position in the digital economy. The
simple truth is this: companies that successfully
harness the identity issue will be able to roll out
compelling new products and services more quickly
and effectively than those that do not.
But it is not just a question of exploiting
digital-identity data for commercial gain. To
develop a truly effective strategy, customers and
their comfort levels should also be at the forefront
of corporate minds at all times, according to Mr
Ryan of Litmus Logic.
“Buyers want to do business with companies
that have less cyber risk—that’s just a fact of life,”
he says. “It doesn’t matter whether they’re
consumers or other businesses.” Many companies
impose strict security requirements on their supply
chains after discovering their own security
shortcomings, he explains. “As a direct result,
they’re now unwilling to do business with other
companies that are still in that position.”
It is just as important to enable customers to
choose how much information they share with an
organisation, how they share it and when,
according to Mr Bonner of KPMG. “If you don’t give
customers and employees control over their
experience of doing business with you in a way that
empowers them, your level of insight into their
habits could quickly become oppressive to them,
and they’ll be less willing to engage.”
Mr Ryan agrees: “There’s rock-solid technology
already out there. We don’t necessarily need more
technologies. We need rock-solid thinking about
how we collect digital-identity data and how we
use it.”
Towards a true digital “fingerprint”
6

Appendix:
Survey
results
Percentages may not
add to 100% owing to
rounding or the ability
of respondents to
choose multiple
responses.
Significantly outperformed
Slightly outperformed
Performed on par
Slightly underperformed
Significantly underperformed
Compared to your peers, rate your company’s profitability in the last 12 months.
(% respondents)
17
43
32
6
1
Now
2-3 years from now
How important are digital platforms, such as the web, mobile, social media and Internet of Things, to your
company’s revenue now? How important do you expect they will be two to three years from now?
Select one in each column.
(% respondents)
Mission-critical, our
primary revenue
channel(s) are digital
leadership
Very important,
digital channels are
very important, but
not central, to our
business
Moderately important,
we use digital
channels but they are
not very important to
our business
Minimally important,
we use digital
channels but they are
not important to our
business
Not at all important;
digital channels are
not at all important or
not used by our
business
27 37 22 11 3
38 35 17 6 3
Very important, digital channels are very important, but not central, to our business
Mission-critical, our primary revenue channel(s) are digital leadership
Moderately important, we use digital channels but they are not very important to our business
Minimally important, we use digital channels but they are not important to our business
Not at all important; digital channels are not at all important or not used by our business
How important are digital platforms, such as the web, mobile, social media and Internet of Things, to your company’s revenue now?
Select one.
(% respondents)
37
27
22
11
3

Mission-critical, our primary revenue channel(s) are digital leadership
Very important, digital channels are very important, but not central, to our business
Moderately important, we use digital channels but they are not very important to our business
Minimally important, we use digital channels but they are not important to our business
Not at all important; digital channels are not at all important or not used by our business
How important do you expect digital platforms, such as the web, mobile, social media and Internet of Things, to your company’s
revenue will be two to three years from now?
Select one.
(% respondents)
38
35
17
6
3
Online commerce
Mobile commerce
Coupons or vouchers
Social media (eg, customer service, marketing)
Sharing economy
Internet of Things
Identity-data sale to third parties
What external digital business activities requiring identity data are you engaged in now or will be in the future?
Please select one in each row.
(% respondents)
Engaged in now Preparing to enter
within 1 year
Expect to enter 2-3
years from now
No plans to enter
68 15 4 12
44 27 14 15
27 19 9 46
55 25 8 12
30 25 17 29
31 29 24 16
24 21 17 38
Collecting and managing digital-identity data
Cutting costs by using digital identity
Managing risks related to identity (eg, security, privacy, fraud)
Monetising personal data
Using digital identity to enter new markets
Compared to your peers, rate your company’s level of digital-identity success.
(% respondents)
Substantially
above average
Somewhat
above average
Average/On par
with peers
Somewhat
below average
Substantially
below average
15 35 45 3 1
14 33 45 6 2
20 40 34 4 1
13 26 42 13 6
13 30 40 13 4

Process automation (eg, faster transactions that require identity)
Customer self-service
Product or service personalisation
Product or service improvements
Research and development
Employee information sharing or collaboration
Partner or supplier information sharing or collaboration
What internal business activities requiring identity data are you engaged in now or will be in the future?
(% respondents)
Engaged in now Preparing to do
within 1 year
Expect to do 2-3
years from now
No plans to do
54 31 6 8
44 32 12 12
44 32 12 12
50 29 13 8
54 26 9 10
53 27 11 8
41 35 14 10
Security
Privacy
Managing legal or regulatory requirements
User experience (eg, ease of sharing and interface use for customers or employees)
Operating across many digital platforms (eg, web, social, mobile, IoT)
Risks related to third-parties (eg, partners, data and technology suppliers)
Using identity to drive revenue growth
What are your company’s top digital-identity challenges?
Select the top three.
(% respondents)
72
44
36
35
31
24
12
Very well prepared
Somewhat well prepared
Moderately prepared
Somewhat underprepared
Very underprepared
How prepared is your organisation to address the information-security requirements of storing and using the digital identities
of customers and employees?
(% respondents)
19
48
26
4
2

What third-party identity sources does your organisation use for customer and/or employee identification, authorisation or
validation now? What parties do you expect to use two years from now?
Select all that apply in each column.
(Number of respondents) Now Two years from now
Social-media companies
(eg, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter)
Employee-services companies
(eg, benefits providers)
Identity-assurance providers
(eg, Equifax, Experian, Transunion, Verizon)
Other
We do not use any
third-party identity providers
100
50
121
60
88
76
16
19
37
57
Employee-services companies (eg, benefits providers)
Social-media companies (eg, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter)
Identity-assurance providers (eg, Equifax, Experian, Transunion, Verizon)
We do not use any third-party identity providers
Other
What third-party identity sources does your organisation use for customer and/or employee identification, authorisation or
validation now?
Select all that apply.
(% respondents)
61
50
44
19
8
Identity-assurance providers (eg, Equifax, Experian, Transunion, Verizon)
Employee-services companies (eg, benefits providers)
We do not use any third-party identity providers
Social-media companies (eg, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter)
Other
What third-party identity sources do you expect for your organisation to use for customer and/or employee identification,
authorisation or validation two years from now?
(% respondents)
39
31
29
26
10

Personal information (eg, name, contact information, demographics)
Likes and preferences
Friends (eg, social graph, friend referrals)
Financial information (eg. credit card, wealth, investments)
Location (eg, GPS)
Internet of Things data (eg, sensors in automobiles, appliances, energy meters)
How willing are customers to share the following types of personal information with your organisation?
(% respondents)
Highly
willing
Moderately
willing
Minimally
willing
Not at all
willing
Not applicable
28 47 17 6 2
23 42 23 5 6
14 33 31 12 10
14 36 27 16 6
20 40 26 7 6
15 37 24 11 12
Explanation of how data are protected
Transparency about how data are used (eg, personalisation, policies on sharing with partners)
Explanation of the benefits to customers (eg, free services, personalised deals)
None of the above
Other
Which of the following approaches does your organisation most frequently use to persuade customers to share data?
Select the top two.
(% respondents)
63
49
39
6
1
Transparency about how data are used (eg, personalisation, policies on sharing with partners)
Explanation of how data are protected
Explanation of the benefits to customers (eg, free services, personalised deals)
Other
How effective are these approaches with customers?
Select one in each row.
(% respondents)
35 58 6 1
25 65 9
37 53 9 1
50 50
What tools does your organisation use to respond to customer concerns about privacy?
(% respondents)
60
45
47
46
33

How effective are these tools in allaying customer concerns?
Select one in each row.
(% respondents)
30 52 17 1
36 57 7
32 54 14
36 55 9
48 41 11
$500m or less
$500m to $1bn
$1bn to $5bn
$5bn or more
What are your organisation’s global annual revenues in
US dollars?
(% respondents)
28
27
28
16
Manufacturing
Financial services
IT and technology
Healthcare, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology
Consumer goods
Retailing
Aerospace and defence
Professional services
Entertainment, media and publishing
Telecoms
Transportation, travel and tourism
Education
Energy and natural resources
Logistics and distribution
Automotive
Chemicals
Construction and real estate
Government/Public sector
Agriculture and agribusiness
What is your primary industry?
(% respondents)
18
14
14
9
7
7
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0
Businesses (eg, 80% or more of sales are to businesses or governments)
Consumers (eg, 80% or more of sales are to consumers)
Both businesses and consumers
Which of the following are your primary customers?
(% respondents)
46
23
31
CEO/president
CFO/Treasurer/comptroller
CIO/CTO/Technology director
Other C-level executive
Head of business unit
Managing Director/Executive Director
SVP/VP/Director
Which of the following best describes your title?
(% respondents)
10
5
41
8
6
12
16
North America
In which region are you based?
(% respondents)
100

Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this
information, neither The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. nor the
sponsor of this report can accept any responsibility or liability
for reliance by any person on this white paper or any of the
information, opinions or conclusions set out in the white paper.
Cover:©Shutterstock

London
20 Cabot Square
London
E14 4QW
United Kingdom
Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000
Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476
E-mail: london@eiu.com
New York
750 Third Avenue
5th Floor
New York, NY 10017
United States
Tel: (1.212) 554 0600
Fax: (1.212) 586 0248
E-mail: newyork@eiu.com
Hong Kong
6001, Central Plaza
18 Harbour Road
Wanchai
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2585 3888
Fax: (852) 2802 7638
E-mail: hongkong@eiu.com
Geneva
Boulevard des
Tranchées 16
1206 Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: (41) 22 566 2470
Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47
E-mail: geneva@eiu.com

The economics of digital identity

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (7)

Similaire à The economics of digital identity

Similaire à The economics of digital identity (20)

Plus de The Economist Media Businesses

Plus de The Economist Media Businesses (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

The economics of digital identity