How do Firms ask for Consumers’ Data Permission? The Value of Companies Data Practices.

On May 25, 2018, the EU introduced the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that offers EU citizens a shelter for their personal information by requesting companies to explain how people’s information is used clearly. To comply with the new law, European and non-European companies interacting with EU citizens undertook a massive data re-permission-request campaign. However, if on the one side the EU Regulator was particularly specific in defining the conditions to get customers’ data access, on the other side, it did not specify how the communication between firms and consumers should be designed. This has left firms free to develop their re-permission emails as they liked, plausibly coupling the informative nature of these privacy-related communications with other persuasive techniques to maximize data disclosure. Consequently, we took advantage of this colossal wave of simultaneous requests to provide insights into two issues. Firstly, we investigate how companies across industries and countries chose to frame their requests. Secondly, we investigate which are the factors that influenced the selection of alternative re-permission formats. In order to achieve these goals, we examine the content of a sample of 1506 re-permission emails sent by 1396 firms worldwide, and we identify the dominant “themes” characterizing these emails. We then relate these themes to both the expected benefits firms may derive from data usage and the possible risks they may experience from not being completely compliant to the spirit of the law. Our results show that: (1) most firms enriched their re-permission messages with persuasive arguments aiming at increasing consumers’ likelihood of relinquishing their data; (2) the use of persuasion is the outcome of a difficult tradeoff between costs and benefits; (3) most companies acted in their self-interest and “gamed the system”. Our results have important implications for policymakers, managers, and customers of the online sector.

An assessment of the business value of traceability practices in the italian fishery processing industry

Traceability is often perceived by food industry executives as an additional cost of doing business, one to be avoided if possible. However, a traceability system can in fact comply the regulatory requirements, increase food safety and recall performance, improving marketing performances and, as well as, improving supply chain management. Thus, traceability affects business performances of firms in terms of costs and benefits determined by traceability practices. Costs and benefits affect factors such as, firms’ characteristics, level of traceability and ,lastly, costs and benefits perceived prior to traceability implementation. This thesis was undertaken to understand how these factors are linked to affect the outcome of costs and benefits. Analysis of the results of a plant level survey of the Italian ichthyic processing industry revealed that processors generally adopt various level of traceability while government support appears to increase the level of traceability and the expectations and actual costs and benefits. None of the firms’ characteristics, with the exception of government support, influences costs and level of traceability. Only size of firms and level of QMS certifications are linked with benefits while precision of traceability increases benefits without affecting costs. Finally, traceability practices appear due to the request from “external“ stakeholders such as government, authority and customers rather than “internal” factors (e.g. improving the firm management) while the traceability system does not provide any added value from the market in terms of price premium or market share increase.