Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Customer Privacy Concerns and Privacy Protective Responses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Customer Relationship Management

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Business and Economics

  • 16k Accesses

Abstract

Companies are increasingly collecting and using data on their current and potential customers to improve their CRM, sales, and service effectiveness. At the same time, they are faced with a growing reluctance of customers to disclose their personal information or to allow tracking of their behaviors because of privacy concerns. This chapter discusses the concept of customer privacy concerns and the respective implications for successful CRM practices. After introducing trends and underlying drivers of customer privacy concerns, this chapter sheds more light on the different governmental regulations concerning privacy in a cross-country comparison. Sections 14.4–14.6 continue with presenting the underlying psychological processes and respective customer responses which are summarized in a comprehensive conceptual framework. At the end of this chapter, implications for a responsible privacy handling related to CRM are drawn.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Blattberg, R. C., Kim, B. D., & Neslin, S. A. (2008). Database marketing: Analyzing and managing customers. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonini, S. M., Greeny, J., & Mendonca, L. T. (2007). Assessing the impact of societal issues: A McKinsey global survey. The McKinsey Quarterly (November).

    Google Scholar 

  • EPIC. (2011). US Patriot Act. http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/#introduction. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Evidon. (2010). Economic impact of privacy on online behavioral advertising. http://www.evidon.com/documents/OBA_paper.pdf. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • FTC. (2000). Privacy online: Fair information practices in the electronic marketplace. http://www.ftc.gov/reports/privacy2000/privacy2000.pdf. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • FTC. (2010). Protecting consumer privacy in an era of rapid change—A proposed framework for businesses and policymakers. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2010/12/101201privacyreport.pdf. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • FTC. (2011). FTC charges deceptive privacy practices in Google’s rollout of its buzz social network. http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1023136/110330googlebuzzcmpt.pdf. Accessed April 7, 2011.

  • Garfinkel, S. L., Juels, A., & Pappu, R. (2005). RFID privacy: An overview of problems and proposed solutions. IEEE Privacy & Security, 3(3), 34–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner. (2006). Gartner says nearly $2 billion lost in E-commerce sales in 2006 due to security concerns of U.S. adults. http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=498974. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Gartner. (2011). Google-FTC settlement may have important privacy implications. http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id=1620221. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Harris, M. H., Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2003). Privacy and attitudes towards internet based selection systems: A cross cultural comparison. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(2–3), 230–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hildner, L. (2006). Defusing the threat of RFID: Protecting consumer privacy through technology-specific legislation at the state level. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 41(1), 133–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Peralta, M. A. (1999). Building consumer trust in online environments: The case for information privacy. Communications of the ACM, 42(4), 80–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ITU. (2010). The world in 2010—ICT facts and figures. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/material/FactsFigures2010.pdf. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • KLM. (2011). KLM surprise. http://surprise.klm.com/. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Kluth, A. (2008). The perils of sharing. The Economist (November 19, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2010). Consumers & convergence IV. http://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/consumers-and-convergence/Documents/Consumers-Convergence-IV-july-2010.pdf. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet Users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Microsoft. (2000). Bill Gates opens SafeNet 2000 summit. http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2000/dec00/safenetpr.mspx. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Miller, C. C., & Wortham, J. (2010). Technology aside, most people still decline to be located. The New York Times (August 29, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Do Not Call Registry. (2011). www.donotcall.gov. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, H. (2007). Privacy checklist for business. Harvard Business Review, 86(10), 123–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltier, J. W., Milne, G. R., & Phelps, J. E. (2009). Information privacy research: Framework for integrating multiple publics, information channels, and responses. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(2), 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfanner, E. (2010). E.U. says it will overhaul privacy regulations. The New York Times (November 4, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • Privacy International. (2011). European privacy and human rights. https://www.privacyinternational.org/ephr. Accessed September 29, 2011.

  • Roznowski, J. L. (2003). A content analysis of mass media stories surrounding the consumer privacy issue 1990–2001. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(2), 52–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, R. T., Kannan, P. K., & Peng, N. (2002). The customer economics of internet privacy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 455–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son, J. Y., & Kim, S. S. (2008). Internet Users’ information privacy-protective responses: A taxonomy and nomological model. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 503–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin, A. R., & Craig, S. (2011). Goldman unit passed on earlier facebook investment. The New York Times (January 6, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E. F., Gueutal, H. G., Gardner, D. G., & McClure, S. (1983). A field experiment comparing information-privacy values, beliefs, and attitudes across several types of organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(3), 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2007). Information overlord–The public wakes up to the surveillance society. The Economist (January 18, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2008). The science of shopping–The way the brain buys. The Economist (December 18, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2010). Location-based services on mobile phones—Follow me. The Economist (March 4, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2011). Anonymous no more. The Economist (March 10, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. A. (2001). The impact of data restrictions on consumer distance shopping. White paper, Direct Marketing Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turow, J, King, J, Hoofnagle, C. J., Bleakley, A., & Hennessy, M. (2009). Americans reject tailored advertising and three activities that enable it. Working paper, UC Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, J. Q. (2004). The Two western cultures of privacy: Dignity versus liberty. Yale Law Journal, 113(6), 1151–1221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, J., & Lwin, M. O. (2009). Regulatory focus theory, trust, and privacy concerns. Journal of Service Research, 12(2), 190–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, J., Lwin, M. O., & Williams, J. D. (2007). Causes and consequences of consumer online privacy concern. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18(4), 326–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, D., & Dholakia, N. (2001). Contrasting European and American approaches to privacy in electronic markets: Property right versus civil right. Electronic Markets, 11(2), 116–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. J. Mack Robinson College of Business Center for Excellence in Brand and Customer Management, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Prof. V. Kumar

  2. Department of Retailing and Customer Management, University of Cologne, Köln, Germany

    Werner Reinartz

Authors
  1. Prof. V. Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Werner Reinartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Kumar .

Appendices

Appendix I (Petlier, Milne, & Phelps, 2009)

Table I.1 Selected settlements in violation of FIP principles
Full size table

Appendix II

European Union

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/index_en.htm

www.privacyinternational.org

United States

www.ftc.com

http://www.export.gov/safeharbor/

https://www.donotcall.gov/

Germany

http://www.bfdi.bund.de/EN/Home/homepage_node.html

http://www.robinsonliste.de/

Research/Reports

http://blogs.wsj.com/wtk-mobile/

http://www.digitalcenter.org/

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kumar, V., Reinartz, W. (2012). Customer Privacy Concerns and Privacy Protective Responses. In: Customer Relationship Management. Springer Texts in Business and Economics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20110-3_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation