Control is shifting from financial/payments provider to accountholder, and the significance of the implications is difficult to overstate. As a business owner and consumer I think I’m the “accountholder” of my payment card or financial account, but in reality the control is really in the hands of my financial provider, who is further limited by available technology platforms, network capabilities, and even government regulations. But bottom line, this “account holder” is just like the hundreds of thousands of consumers or business owners we’ve collected research data from, in that I crave the ability to control which transactions are allowed to occur in my accounts, as well as which specific transactions, channels and thresholds are used to alert me of specific activity based on conditions I’ve set in advance. And by the way, I want all that to be simple to operate. And one more thing: like many “account holders” these capabilities may go beyond just preventing losses, but also may have a big impact on which card I decide to use or what new account I apply for in the future.
The MasterCard / Orbiscom inControl announcement on this subject is the first significant industry-wide announcement that we’ve seen which falls under what we’ve been calling “UDLAPs” (user defined limits and prohibitions) for years now. We have 3 years of longitudinal history on what UDLAPs actually exist, and even longer historical data on what consumers want or are prepared to use to get more control (or alerts) on their accounts.
I’ve rarely been more sure of anything: control is shifting from financial provider, UDLAPs and IFMs are the primary levers that will make it happen, and the term “account holder” is about to become a reality. Get ready for the follow-on shift in loyalty and transaction volume.
