Traditionally, when a company bought a business data list, it was very much at the mercy of the supplier. There was little control or accreditation in the industry apart from the List Warranty Register and the Data Information Act and if purchasers did not know what questions to ask, they could easily be hoodwinked into buying lists that were ill-maintained or worse, of dubious provenance.
Then, in March 2004, the DMA launched the Business List Audit (BLA). Best practice manager of the DMA James Hawkes states that it was initially put in place as a transparency audit but with the view of becoming a data quality check later.
Like anything new, it received mixed reviews. But according to Hawkes, it was misunderstood. We launched the audit to address concerns around data accuracy in B2B because it is very fast moving. It was intended to ensure transparency so that customers know what they are getting. He adds, A recent development was to improve online accreditation with better logic and automated failures. The DMA also introduced new elements to the audit at the end of last year. We now follow up with a site visit so that suppliers cannot tweak the answers.
Completed online, the audit leads data suppliers through 34 questions in five sections, which asks them to declare information and practices ranging from source summary and how regularly elements of the list are verified, to internal/external data cleaning, returns policy and systems used to manage deletions or gone-aways.
Those in favour
A staunch supporter of the list is list specialist LBM. Says director Verran Townsend: We were the fourth business to join the BLA and we have been behind it ever since. Data quality is very important. You supply the information, get notification as to whether you have passed and then there is a site visit and companies submit 10 customers, which the DMA then surveys, he says. It is all about the process and rigor behind management of the database.
LBM achieved accreditation in November 2004. We take it seriously, says Townsend. The DMA supplies a logo and we have it throughout our literature, website and stationery. It is a great start.
However, Townsend suggests that the lack of differentiation between large and small lists provides an opportunity for refinement of the audit. A company could have a niche list but the questions are the same, whether you have one thousand records or a file with 2.7 million businesses. He also points out that a company with a mailing-only list is asked how recently it has updated phone numbers. The question may not be relevant but a list supplier could still fail.
LBM has two thousand call centre seats and updates lists through routine calling out. It also accepts calls on behalf of clients. Our core area is making outbound phone calls to check and gather information, and set appointments to sell, says Townsend. A proportion of that is dedicated to calling into our base file and we keep it fresh that way.
The sceptics
Not all data suppliers are so unashamedly supportive of the BLA. Conduit has BLA accreditation but at the time it achieved the standard, DMA was not checking information supplied. There was no mechanism for their [representatives] coming in and looking at the data, says managing director Steve Wilcox, whose company underwent an ABC audit in 1997/98. ABC no longer provides this accreditation but Wilcox feels it had the edge over the BLA because it involved an external audit. There is no place to hide when you are measured by an independent party. Conduit sells niche lists of the top 150,000 companies in automotive (fleet), IT and telecoms sectors. We aim to create rich information around these areas, he says.
Conduit undertakes telephone validation of data contacts, to make sure they are fresh. Contacts age out at around 15-20 per cent a year, so they need to be checked regularly, says Wilcox. Business data decays at a rate of 28 per cent annually, costing UK businesses £200 million a year. Nothing is one hundred per cent accurate but we try to get close to it. Our gone-away rate is one per cent.
Although he is critical, Steve Wilcox is not totally negative about the BLA. Anything that helps raise quality standards has to be a good thing, he says. Information Arts, which buys third party data, is not yet convinced the BLA is a strong enough yardstick. Joint managing director Gary Selby says: We have always been supporters of the list in principle, because for independent buyers of data, it is difficult to assess and compare quality of providers. We wanted something with two remits: it had to be accessible and respected, and it had to have teeth.
Needs to be tighter
Another worry is that spurious data providers could tamper with the BLA. Selby: It is still early days but the BLA has not achieved general acceptance, and issues around enforcement could cause problems. It is still self-surveying and if people are doing dodgy things with data, they could manipulate it. There might be a temptation to guestimate to achieve registration.
On the website it says a compliance officer ‘will’ or ‘may’ come round, says Selby. I think that level of audit and investigation should be compulsory to give it teeth. Selby admits that it is difficult to know what to look for. Information Arts uses a portfolio of data owners and it knows what levels of honesty or what limitations to expect from their data.
He adds, When new data sets come up, we are rigorous in evaluating them, taking a random test sample and applying necessary data quality controls. Our maximum gone-away rate is two per cent but some raw data we get in is significantly higher than that.
Marketscan also questions take-up of the BLA. Says managing director Julie Knight: It is still in its infancy and not a lot of companies have bought into it. There are other measures you can take and members of the DMA have to adhere to certain practices.
Marketscan is a member of the DMA, registered under the Data Protection Act and the List Warranty. It also subscribes to suppression files such as TPS, CTPS, FPS and so on. We run them against our database daily, so clients know our data is current, says Knight. We source data only from reputable companies and work closely with them. We have 40 quality checks that we run on every record that comes into the company. Marketscan guarantees two per cent deliverability and gives cash refunds against gone-aways.
Taking criticism on the chin
The DMA is taking industry criticism of the BLA seriously. Says James Hawkes: We are going to introduce a quality element to the audit and we take on board criticisms regarding stringency. This will happen over the next few months. Samples of list owners’ data will be audited externally to provide a data card breakdown and we will request samples to check accuracy and validate the database. And those who do not renew accreditation will lose the right to use the BLA logo.
The Telemarketing Company generates sales leads appointments and carries out database validation and list building. We buy databases and enhance them, or work a client’s list and validate that, and as a result, produce lists that are tiptop, says managing director Niall Habba. It is BLA accredited. The BLA is based around good practice and we comply with that. It is very good that there is a way of differentiating quality because there are some appaling lists available. The DMA is about to visit The Telemarketing Company to undertake an audit. To be recognised, it is necessary to submit to external adjudication, says Habba.
Compliance with teeth
Nigel Bennett business development director of B2B marketing for Experian, gives good advice on what questions to ask in order to ensure quality is up to scratch. If the BLA appears on posted material, it is a tick in the box, he says. But people do not always ask where the data is from. If a potential supplier won’t or can’t answer that, it draws a major question mark over the legality of the data and buyers should see a huge warning sign. Source is vital. He also points out that asking how often a database is updated does not elicit a detailed enough answer. How often are fields updated? Technically, a database may be refreshed regularly, but any one field could be 28 days or two years old. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
And regarding gone-away rates: The DMA quotes six per cent but a compiled data list should be lower than six per cent if mailed within 28 days of purchase. Our current rate is lower than three per cent and we give 30p back for every gone-away received, provided the list is mailed within 90 days of receiving it. Nigel Bennett is a protagonist of the BLA. It is a good starting point.The DMA is respected as an industry body and the accreditation is credible. It gives entry to smaller and larger bodies.
The DMA’s stated intention of transforming the BLA into a quality audit, complete with external audits and sample checks, will give the audit the teeth it needs to ensure data quality. It will elevate the profile and the standing of the sector and weed out those of ill repute. It is a turning point for the industry.
