Behavioural Fingerprint Report
Behavioural Fingerprint Report
Contents 01
Foreword 02
Building the database 06
Financial Sector 13
Retail Sector 22
Contact Centres 31
User Experience (UX) 40
The Future 49
Technical Appendix 52
01 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Foreword
In this paper, we’ve compiled the insights from nearly five years of
applying our Behavioural Science expertise to improve customer
experience, and synthesised these into a series of insightful
Behavioural fingerprints. Are you interested in, planning to, or
currently applying Behavioural Science in your business? If so, the
methodology used to produce the Behavioural fingerprints in this
paper will give you several unparalleled business benefits:
Over the past 5 years, working with some of the biggest brands
and businesses in the world, Cowry Consulting has contributed to a
growing body of evidence from different business sectors and
across various channels, including UX, business communications,
contact centres and physical environments.
02 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
For every behavioural change assignment we’ve been challenged
with, we’ve populated a growing database with 40+ different use
cases, focused on the financial services and retail sectors. For each
use case, we’ve detailed the cognitive biases that create friction
and inhibit behaviour, and the biases that promote fluent
behavioural interventions that significantly change behaviour and
drive business success. We now have a rich database from which to
identify patterns that exist in the financial and retail sectors and
within contact centres and UX.
03 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
The Business Benefit
This paper will reveal what we’ve learned from nearly five years of
expertise with applying Behavioural Science to transform customer
experience for the finance and retail sectors, across contact
centres and user experiences. For businesses, these findings offer
several benefits: the ability to quickly and confidently benchmark
your existing customer experience against the channel fingerprint;
the knowledge of which C-Factors are needed to transform your
current customer experience; and the ability to visualise and
communicate to stakeholders how your newly optimised customer
experience has shifted positively.
04 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
What Now and What Next?
The Second Stage will be conducted by the end of 2020, and will
allow us to identify which words, phrases and design features
within the C-Factors are predictive of business success.
05 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Building the database
Our toolkit
At Cowry, we’ve distilled these down to those that are the most
important for customer and employee decision making in a
business context. We call this set of behavioural science principles
the ‘C-Factors’.
07 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
08 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
10%
09 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
How do we use the C-factors to help our clients?
Behavioural Audit
We begin by conducting a Friction audit,
during which we identify the C-Factor which
is causing cognitive friction in an asset. For
example, an email may contain too much
text and no images, and so we identify that
Cognitive Overload is the C-Factor which
hinders engagement with this email.
Behavioural Design
Having identified pain points such as this
within an asset, we then translate these
into cognitively Fluent re-designs. Again,
these recommendations are guided using
the C-Factors, so for Cognitive Overload
we might recommend reducing the amount
of text, chunking it up into manageable
sections, and adding imagery.
Behavioural Intervention
T h e fi n a l sta g e of o u r p ro c ess i s
Behavioural Intervention, where we put our
recommendations into practice with an
experiment to measure effectiveness.
10 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Building the database
Populating the database with C-Factors
11 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
How to read the Fingerprints
The further out the point, the greater the impact of this
C-Factor. Each Fingerprint is designed to give you a
quick visual indication of where the problems lie
(Friction) and the corresponding solution (Fluency).
Example Example
[Friction] Fingerprint [Fluency] Fingerprint
-1
-2 2
1
0 1
-2 2
-1
1
-3 -2
Optimism bias -1-1 0 -1 Optimism bias 3 2
0
1 0
2
-1 1 0
0 0
0 -1 -2 2
-1 1 1
Cognitive Overload
12 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Financial Sector
Financial Sector Results
Setting the scene
14 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Financial Sector
[Friction] Fingerprint
Saliency
-1.53
-1.8
Commitment
-0.8 Authority
-2.07
-1.4
-3 -2 -1 0 -1.2 Empathy
Optimism -0.4
Bias Gap
-0.73
-0.13
-1.13 -2.07
-0.53
-1.33
Defaults Cognitive
Overload
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
15 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Financial Sector
[Fluency] . Fingerprint
Saliency
2.52
1.57
Optimism 3 2 1 0 Empathy
0.82 1.29 Gap
Bias
1.19
0.1
0.9
2.43
Defaults Cognitive
1.1 1.38
Easing
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
16 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Case study 1
Award-winning conversations
Business Context
Aegon wanted to transform their contact centre conversations using behavioural
science, tapping into psychology to identify the pain-points in their current
exchanges between customer and agent, and translate these into genuinely
empowering interactions. Having identified that they needed to overhaul their
telephone interactions, we helped Aegon conduct an audit of their existing call
scripts, optimising the content to remove the jargon and make the dialogue more
human.
Behavioural Challenge
Interactions with contact centres can be arduous and time-consuming. Advisors
often fail to explain complex information in a simple way, leaving the customer
with a negative experience. Our task was to transform contact centre
conversations to help call agents confidently navigate complex interactions and
ensure that customers could easily understand their options, act upon them, and
feel confident in the decisions they had made.
Behavioural Solution
We used our Award Winning conversations programme to help Aegon employees
have better conversations. We achieved this through:
Screens - Visually redesigning the scripts to make the agent’s job easier
17 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Example [Friction].
Cognitive Overload
Authority Bias
Example [Fluency] .
Cognitive Easing
Framing
18 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Results] .
ROI £37 : 1
for Assets Under Management
NPS +17 to +32 in just 5 weeks
+23% Employee engagement
-46% Attrition
A / B Split test methodology of 1,738 Calls
19 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Aegon Behavioural Fingerprint
Saliency
-1.53
-1.8
Commitment 0
-1
Authority
-1 -0.8
-2
-2.07
-2 -1.4
-3
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
Whilst all of the C-Factors played a role in the Friction audit, our
analysis reveals that three in particular were hindering Aegon’s
customer experience:
Cognitive Overload: too much complex information was
presented,
Commitment: call agents asked customers questions to which
they often responded ‘no’, thus reducing their commitment,
Loss Aversion: customers were not made aware of all the
benefits they stood to lose by not signing up to the new service.
20 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Aegon Case Study
[Fluency] Fingerprint
Saliency
1.86 1.38
Commitment 1.52
Authority
1 1
2.52
2 0
1.57
1
Optimism 3 2 1 0 Empathy
0 1.29
Bias 0.821 Gap
0
1.19 0
0.1
0.9
2.43
3
1 1 1.38
1.1 Cognitive
Easing
Defaults
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
21 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Retail Sector
Retail Sector Results (UX)
Setting the scene
23 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Retail Sector
[Friction]. Fingerprint
Saliency
-2
Commitment
-1.5
-1.17 Authority
-1 -1
Optimism -3 -2 -1 0 -1 Empathy
-0.17 Gap
Bias
-0.33
-0.33 -0.33 -2
Defaults -1 Cognitive
-1.5 Overload
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
24 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Retail Sector
[Fluency] . Fingerprint
Saliency
2.33
2.17
Commitment
1.33
Authority
2.33
1.33
3 2 1 0 Empathy
Optimism 1
0.5 Gap
Bias
0.67
0.17 1.83
0.83
Defaults Cognitive
1.33 Easing
1.67
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
25 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Case study 2
Delivering the ROI Goods
Business Context
Tesco recognised an opportunity to optimise Tesco’s Delivery Saver customer
conversion rates by enlisting the help of Cowry. Delivery Saver is a subscription-
based delivery service that helps customers reduce the cost of home deliveries for
grocery orders. Together, they identified the need to transform three different plan
reminder emails, in order to convert customers from free trials to paid plans. From
this Cowry analysed the existing emails to identify psychological friction points
that could be converted into opportunities to motivate and engage customers.
Behavioural Audit
Within the behavioural audit, our team identified a number of components within
the emails that were hindering their effectiveness. For example, the email
contained a large quantity of information, displayed in large blocks of text
meaning customers were unlikely to read or act on it. Our task was then to
overhaul the language and visual design of the emails to increase engagement
with the content and motivate action.
Behavioural Design
Our team of Choice Architect's and Behavioural Designers redesigned the email
templates that were used to notify customers at 3 stages of their free trial by
introducing 8 key interventions. Here's are 3 examples of what we did:
26 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Friction].
Cognitive Overload
Saliency
[Fluency] .
Social norms
Committment
27 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Results] .
+10.2% increase
in sign ups to Delivery Saver
p score = 0.1
28 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Tesco Delivery Saver Behavioural Fingerprint
Saliency
-2
-2
Commitment
-1.5
-1.17 Authority
-1
-1
-1 -1
-1
Optimism -3 -2 -1 0 -1
Empathy
-1 -0.17
Bias 0 Gap
-0.33 0
-0.33 -0.33 -2
-3
-1 -1
-1 Cognitive
-1.5
Overload
Defaults -2
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
Our analysis reveals that the C-Factors which were causing the
most Friction were:
29 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Tesco Case Study
[Fluency] Fingerprint
Saliency
2.33
3
3
Commitment 2.17
1.33
Authority
3
2.33 2
1.33
Optimism Empathy
3 2 -1 0
Bias 1 2 Gap
1 0.5
10.67
0.17
1.83
0.83
3
1 1 Cognitive
1.33 Easing
2 1.67
Defaults 2
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
30 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Contact Centres
Contact Centre Results
The database also has the ability to look at which C-Factors can
be used to identify and solve problems by the different channels
that customers interact with businesses.
32 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Contact Centre
[Friction]. Fingerprint
Saliency
Commitment
-1.8 -1
Authority
-0.9
-2.3 -2.1
Optimism -3 -2 -1 0 Empathy
-0.3 -1.1 Gap
Bias
-0.5
-0.1 -1.6
-0.5
-1
Defaults Cognitive
-1.2 Overload
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
33 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Contact Centre
[Fluency] . Fingerprint
Saliency
Commitment 1.67
1.33
Authority
0.42
2.5 1.92
3 2 1 0 Empathy
Optimism 1.25
Bias 0.58 Gap
0.75
0.17
2.08
0.92
Defaults 1.17 Cognitive
1.33
Easing
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
34 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Case study 3
Optimise responses to price increase objections
Business Context
SAGA wanted to transform their contact-centre conversations using Behavioural
Science. Many of their customers were unhappy about their motor insurance
premium increasing, and therefore choosing not to renew. Cowry were tasked with
suggesting how they could help their call agents increase renewal rates without
giving away too much of a discount to customers.
Behavioural Audit
Cowry helped SAGA conduct a ‘friction audit’ of their existing call scripts. We
identified that the agent’s response to a price increase objection was the key pain
point. At this point in the call, agents were failing to explain complex information in
a simple way and give a structured reason to explain the change in price. This left
customers with a negative experience.
Behavioural Design
The Cowry team transformed the conversation by redesigning the order, language
and how of information presented and then trained the agents with the new
scripts. This helped the agents confidently navigate complex interactions and
ensure that customers could easily understand their policy and why there was a
price increase, making them feel confident in their insurance provider. Here’s 3
examples of what we did:
35 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Friction] .
Ambiguity Aversion
Authority Bias
[Fluency].
Ambiguity Aversion
Authority Bias
Commitment
36 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Results]
£9.73:1 ROI
Equivalent to +£330,000 Revenue
37 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
SAGA Behavioural Fingerprint
Saliency
Commitment
-1.8 -1
Authority
-1 -1
-0.9
-2.3 -2.1
0
-1
0
Optimism -3 -2 -1 00
Empathy
-0.3 -1.1
Bias Gap
0
-0.5 0
-1 0 0
-0.1
-1.6
-0.5
-1
-1
Cognitive
-1.2
Overload
Defaults
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
Our analysis reveals that the C-Factors with the biggest detrimental
impact were:
38 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
SAGA Case study
[Fluency] Fingerprint
Saliency
2 2
Commitment 1.67
1.33 Authority
0.42
2.5 2 1.92
0
1
Optimism 3 2 1 00 0
Empathy
1.25
Bias 0.58 Gap
0
0.75 0 1
0.17
2.08
1 0.92
1.17 Cognitive
1.33
Easing
2
Defaults
3
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
In the Fluent calls, the importance of Framing and Social Norms were
both dialled up significantly from the Friction, and Commitment,
Cognitive Easing and Authority Bias all contributed towards the
success of the Fluent calls.
39 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
User Experience (UX)
UX Results
Defining the challenges and opportunities
41 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
UX
[Friction]. Fingerprint
Saliency
-1.87
Commitment
-1.4
-1.2 Authority
-1.27
-0.87
Optimism -3 -2 -1 0 Empathy
-0.27 -0.87 Gap
Bias
-0.73
-0.2 -1.4
-0.47
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
42 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
UX
[Fluency] . Fingerprint
Saliency
Commitment 1.61
1.17 Authority
1.95
1
Optimism 3 2 1 0 Empathy
1.22
Bias 0.67 Gap
1.33 1.5
0.28
0.67
Defaults 1.11 Cognitive
1.56 Easing
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental Framing
Accounting
43 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Case study 4
Increasing purchase of fruit & veg boxes
Business Context
Abel & Cole, a leading presence in the foodbox industry, had started to suffer with
the increased amount of competition in the market. To combat this, they
developed an effective marketing strategy and customers were eager to visit their
site to choose their first foodbox. Unfortunately, the UX journey had been
overlooked in terms of complexity meaning a lot of potential customers bouncing
off-site. Abel & Cole entrusted Cowry to improve this journey using Behavioural
Science.
Behavioural Audit
Cowry conducted a behavioural audit to identify the psychological ‘friction points’
in the UX journey. They discovered that customers were struggling to find the
boxes, let alone choose from the vast number of options. Customers were
bombarded with information leading them to be cognitively overloaded and
unsure on what to do next.
Behavioural Design
Cowry’s team of behavioural scientists took the findings from the audit and used
them to redesign the website. The nudges with the most impact on behaviour
were:
44 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Friction] .
Saliency
Ambiguity Aversion
Social norms
Cognitive Overload
[Fluency].
Ambiguity Aversion
Social norms
45 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
[Results]
- 20% reduction
in drop out
+ 20% increase
in response
46 Behavioural Fingerprint
Abel & Cole Behavioural Fingerprint
Saliency
-3
-1.87
-2
Commitment
-1.4
Authority
-1.2
-2
-2
-1.27
-0.87
Optimism -3 -2 -1 0 Empathy
-0.27 -0.87
Bias -2
0 Gap
-3
-0.73 0
-0.2 -1.4
-0.47
-1
-0.87 -3
-1.2 Cognitive
-1
Overload
Defaults
-2
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
Our analysis reveals that the most important C-Factors impeding sign
up for Abel & Cole were:
47 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Abel & Cole Case study
[Fluency] Fingerprint
Saliency
3
2
2
Commitment
1.61
Authority
1.17
3
1.95 2
Optimism 3 2 1 0 Empathy
1
Bias 0 1.22 Gap
0.67
1 0 0
1.33 1.5
0.28
0.67
1 3
1.11 Cognitive
1.56 Easing
Defaults
Loss Aversion
Present Bias
Mental
Framing
Accounting
48 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
The Future
The Future
How these C Factors can be used in combination
Within original Friction assets, there are no strong clusters of C-Factors. This
is to be expected, given that assets span a broad range of clients, sectors,
and target audiences.
When solving these problems, a larger variety of C-Factors are often used
and there are three key C-Factors which appear to drive project success:
Loss Aversion, Authority Bias, and Saliency.
The use of C-Factors is similar across different sectors (i.e. Finance compared
to Retail), whereas the use of C-Factors is different across various types of
projects (i.e. UX compared to Contact Centres)
The most critical pair of positive C Factors that help in solving business
problems are Cognitive Easing and Ambiguity Aversion. It’s crucial to make
complex information easier to understand, whilst clearly managing
expectations about processes and timeframes. Taken together, this
combination of C-Factors is a key determinant of success.
50 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
What next?
www.cowryconsulting.com
51 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Technical Appendix
The Data
Figure 1: Average C-Factor prevalence weights across all projects; pre-design (left),
post-design (middle), change from pre to post-design (right)
53 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Note that pre-design C-Factor prevalence weights are negative
(reflecting negative C-Factor usage that can be improved.
Financial Sector
Retail Sector
Figure 2: Average C-Factor prevalence weights across the financial sector (top row)
and the retail sector (bottom row); pre-design (left), post-design (middle), change
from pre to post-design (right)
54 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Figure 3 details the average C-Factor breakdown across projects
in the UX domain and the call centre domain respectively.
UX
Contact Centres
Figure 3: Average C-Factor prevalence weights across UX (top row) and contact
centres (bottom row); pre-design (left), post-design (middle), change from pre to
post-design (right)
55 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
C-Factor Landscape
56 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
C-Factor Impact Drivers – A Machine Learning approach
At the end of this process we are left with three key C-Factors (in
order of importance, highest first):
Loss Aversion
Authority Bias
Saliency
57 Behavioural Fingerprint TM
Given the relative weights in any given text of the C-Factors (the
C-Factor fingerprint of the text), the model predicts some vs high
impact with 79% accuracy.
Across the 1000 model attempts (our bootstrap models), all but the
worst 1% of models achieve an accuracy above 69%. The results are
therefore highly robust to noise and/or potential idiosyncrasies
among the specific set of projects used as basis for the analysis.
Predicted 1 9 3 0.250
Predicted 2 3 14 0.176
58 Behavioural Fingerprint TM