Advertisement

Electronic Markets

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 95–108 | Cite as

Personal data: how context shapes consumers’ data sharing with organizations from various sectors

  • Bjoern RoeberEmail author
  • Olaf Rehse
  • Robert Knorrek
  • Benjamin Thomsen
Special Theme

Abstract

Data – in particular personal data – is becoming a critical asset in more and more industries beyond the Internet sector. Applications based on such data, to improve existing products and processes as well as to create completely new ones, are regarded as a major driver of economic growth. At the same time consumers’ concerns about the proper use of their data by organizations are growing. We conducted a conjoint study, comprising more than 3000 participants, to investigate consumers’ data sharing sensitivities along six dimensions of context and across ten private and public sectors covering the whole economy. We find that nearly all consumers (99.9 % of our sample) want to share personal data with organizations if the benefits and terms suffice their needs. Second, we show that consumers clearly discriminate between organizations from various industry sectors when it comes to their willingness to share their data. Third, we find that context of sharing personal data is more important in the consumers’ decision making than the actual data itself. Further, we provide evidence that the right to be forgotten can significantly increase consumers’ willingness to share their data.

Keywords

Digital identity Personal data Privacy Conjoint Data protection 

JEL classification

O24 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude towards the people and organizations who supported this effort, especially Manuel Kohnstamm, Stephan Luiten, and Elmar Krack all of Liberty Global, Inc. as well as Jeroen Hardon of Skim Group and The Boston Consulting Group. Thanks also to Helen Yuanyuan Cao for her advice.

References

  1. Acquisti, A. and Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: awareness, information sharing, privacy on the Facebook, Privacy Enhancing Technology Workshops (PET), 1–22.Google Scholar
  2. Acquisti, A., John, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2009). What is privacy worth? Twenty First Workshop on Information Systems and Economics (WISE).Google Scholar
  3. Acquisti, A., John, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2011). Strangers on a plane: context-dependent willingness to divulge sensitive information. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 858–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauer, C., Korunovska, J., Spiekermann, S. (2012). On the value of information – what facebook users are willing to pay. ECIS 2012 Proceedings, Paper 197.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, K. (2011). Sony scrambles to limit hacking scandal; http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6678a986-758f-11e0-8492-00144feabdc0.html. Accessed on 26 Feb 2013.
  6. Bughin, J. (2011). Digital user segmentation and privacy concerns. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 156–165.Google Scholar
  7. Carifio, J., & Perla, R. (2008). Resolving the 50-year debate around using and misusing Likert scales. Medical Education, 42, 1150–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Central Intelligence Agency (2012). The world factbook: Germany, Poland, Netherlands. Updated 2012, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook. Accessed 26 Feb 2013.
  9. Cvrcek, D., Danezis, G., Kumpost, M., & Matya, V. (2006). A Study on the value of location privacy. Proceedings of the Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES ’06), 109–118.Google Scholar
  10. Eurobarometer (2011), Special Eurobarometer 359, Attitudes on Data Protection and Electronic Identity in the European Union, Directorate-General Information Society and Media (INFSO), the Directorate-General Justice (JUST) and the Directorate-General JRC, http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_359_en.pdf. Accessed 26 Feb 2013.
  11. Hann, I.-H., Hui, K.-L., Lee, T. S. and Png, I. P. L. (2003). The value of online privacy: an empirical estimation. Working paper, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  12. Hinz, O., Gerstmeier, E., Tafreschi, O., Enzmann, M., Schneider, M. (2007) Customer loyalty programs and privacy concerns. 20th Bled eConference eMergence: Merging and Emerging Technologies, Processes, and Institutions. Google Scholar
  13. Krasnova, H., Hildebrand, T., Guenther, O. (2009). Investigating the value of privacy in online social networks: conjoint analysis. Proceedings of International Conference On Information Systems (ICIS).Google Scholar
  14. Maude, F. (2012). Open Government Partnership conference (OGP). Speech. http://www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/2012/apr/18/francis-maude-data-raw-material. Accessed 26 Feb 2013.
  15. Medick, V., & Teevs, C. Datenskandal: Telekom soll BKA mit Millionen Kundendaten beliefert haben, http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/datenskandal-telekom-soll-bka-mit-millionen-kundendaten-beliefert-haben-a-617044.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2013.
  16. Orme, B. K. (2002). Formulating attributes and levels in conjoint analysis. Research Paper Series, Sawtooth Software.Google Scholar
  17. Senecal, S., & Nantel, J. (2004). The influence of online product recommendations on consumers’ online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Westin, A. F. (1967). Privacy and freedom. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
  19. World Economic Forum (2013), http://www.weforum.org/issues/rethinking-personal-data. Accessed 26 Feb 2013.

Copyright information

© Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjoern Roeber
    • 1
    Email author
  • Olaf Rehse
    • 1
  • Robert Knorrek
    • 1
  • Benjamin Thomsen
    • 1
  1. 1.The Boston Consulting GroupDüsseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations