Citizens Advice wants to build a deep understanding of how consumers are likely to react to smart home products and services, what they see as the benefits and risks of these technologies and what consumer protections they would have. What consumers want, need and expect from interactions with smart home devices (benefits / risks, perceived value / concerns). We started by introducing smart home technology through fact sheets and real-life examples and discussed the benefits and concerns of these products.
A minority suggests that the value of smart home technology cannot be isolated based on individual benefits, and should be viewed in terms of what it means as a whole when connected: “improving someone's life”.
Overall view of benefits vs. risks of smart technology
Benefits and concerns
Background & context Methodology
Benefits vs. risks Data collection
Redress Redress
Issues, responsibility & redress Key findings
Data collection & usage
Participant feedback
Openness towards sharing data
Initial assumptions about data collection
Not really concerned about sharing data but I am starting to think about
I don’t think there’s anything they wouldn’t collect.”
Types of data consumers are comfortable sharing
Data collection & usageSuch data includes
If it’s just general information then it’s ok!"
If I ask Alexa what’s the Reading score then I get an email with an offer on
Data that feels too sensitive to share
Individually it doesn’t mean anything, but put it all together and you get a good
17 Consumers were happy that the information they didn't mind sharing was collected by default, and that people were given the opportunity to opt out if they wanted. Conversely, they wanted the information that seemed sensitive to share not to be collected by default and to be given the opportunity to opt-in if they wanted.
I don’t what my data being shared with anyone – even if that gives me a better
You should be able to go back and change your preferences.”
I don’t think anything should be collected by default.”
Conditions that reassure consumers about sharing data
They should be open about how they use it, then that might be ok.”
If you’re aware of the benefit you may be more willing to share .”
Comparison to other data consumers already share
Data collection Redress
Issues, responsibility & redress
What safeguards should be in place when something goes wrong and how it can be avoided. In most groups, participants first tried to identify who was responsible for an issue and how it could be addressed. It took prompting from the facilitators to guide the discussion through this exercise, and while participants gave different suggestions about how the issues should be addressed, they were less focused on who should be held accountable for fixing the issues and more concerned with with the solution itself.
Many assume that problems occur due to setup issues, so it's technically their fault, but believe they should be supported to avoid such errors. Participants would use the word 'producer' interchangeably to mean anyone who appeared to be involved in the product – the supplier, the designer, the seller, etc. – and did not explicitly distinguish between smart products and services provided using smart products. Almost all participants felt that there should be 'someone to call' when things go wrong, and for most this meant a phone call to a human operator.
What happens when things go wrong
What if there is no one to phone?”
If it happened once, people would worry about it happening
Scenarios
In most scenarios, participants either felt that the problems were 'the manufacturer's responsibility' or were their own responsibility (but believe that they should be supported by someone to avoid such mistakes). Many believed that the error occurred due to their own mistakes during setup or their purchasing decisions. Some participants expressed fear of mistakes due to their misuse/misunderstanding and suggested that they wanted guidance during set-up or purchase to ensure they made the right decisions and remove responsibility from them when things go wrong.
The exceptions were scenarios 4 and 6 (smart lock and failing company) where it was clear to participants that the product failed through no fault of their own. Despite this, they still struggled to track down exactly who was responsible in these cases and suggested that it was the manufacturer. Participants would use the word 'manufacturer' interchangeably, to mean anyone who appeared to be involved in the product (the supplier, designer, seller, etc.).
When other stakeholders were introduced as part of the scenario, for example an insurance company (scenario 1), or a thief (scenario 2), some participants identified these parties as responsible for the issues.
Issues, responsibility and redress - Whose responsibility?
It required prompting from facilitators to guide the discussion through this exercise and as participants gave. When other stakeholders were introduced as part of the scenario, for example an insurance company (scenario 1) or a burglar (scenario 2), some participants identified these parties as responsible for problems. While participants were unsure who was responsible, in most scenarios participants believed that the problems should be the responsibility of the manufacturer. Where the producer was understood as someone who was not them and who had a professional/commercial relationship with the product). In some cases (especially in the community workshop with older people), the participants believed that the manufacturers should provide a service that helps them set the products correctly to avoid problems and ensure that the full responsibility actually lay with the manufacturer.
They need to bring it to everyone's attention but you
While participants were unsure who was responsible, in most scenarios participants believed that the problems should be the responsibility of the manufacturer. Where the producer was understood as someone who was not them and who had a professional/commercial relationship with the product). I want to know how the data will be used and how this may affect me before I use the product. Although they had difficulty defining who, in all cases the participants said that they wished there was someone they could easily contact by phone who could help when something goes wrong.
They said they are often referred from one person to another and the people on the phone don't know how to help. They also felt that in all cases where something had broken (i.e. the Echo Dot), the participants felt that their devices should have warranties and if something did go wrong, they should be replaced quickly. In some cases with more serious consequences (e.g. the refrigerator and health insurance, the smart lock burglary), participants believed that manufacturers should be able to identify unusual behavior in advance and alert the consumer to resolve the situation before it becomes a problem.
In Cases 1 and 2, which were based on product collection behavior data, participants felt that the manufacturer should be more alert to changing behavior or that something unusual is happening and should communicate this to customers. In the case of scenario 4 the participants felt that they should receive a warning through the application if there was a problem, as the consequences of being locked out are very severe. This may be because the participants felt that the scenarios are less burdensome and they involve technologies that the participants would rely on less.
Issues, responsibility and redress - What should happen next?
Many commented on their current frustration with customer service systems and the difficulty of quickly getting in touch with someone who could resolve their issue. They suggested that a manual transfer would be a sufficient solution and were more concerned about avoiding the problems that solve these problems.
There needs to be someone that you can get a hold of.”
Once something goes wrong I would give up.”
In some cases with more serious consequences (e.g. the refrigerator and health insurance, the hack related to the smart lock), participants felt that the manufacturers should be able to identify unusual behavior in advance and warn the consumer to resolve the situation before it becomes a problem In cases 1 and 2 that relied on the product collecting behavioral data, participants felt that the manufacturer should be more alert to behavioral change, or something unusual occurring and communicate this to customers. In the case of scenario 4, participants thought that they should receive a warning through the application if there are any problems, as the consequences of exclusion are very serious. There was less discussion about what should happen next in scenarios 3 and 5. This may be because participants felt the scenarios were less severe and they involved technologies that participants would be less reliant on. They suggested that a manual replacement would be a sufficient solution and were more concerned with how to avoid the problems it solves. Scenario What should happen next. as well as having someone to contact easily, and the product being replaced or repaired by the manufacturer under warranty). Data abuse: smart fridge • Manufacturer should be proactive in contacting me and letting me know that something is wrong or that there has been a change. Data Breach: Smart Camera • Manufacturer needs to be proactive in contacting me and letting me know that something is wrong or that there has been a change.
Ease of use: smart lock • The manufacturer should be proactive in contacting me and letting me know that something is wrong or that there has been a change.
Issues, responsibility and redress - How can this be avoided?
You want to ultimately have control yourself."
34;Technology not straightforward – you have to know what you’re
It should be easy to read, and the parts that might affect me should be highlighted. Usability: smart lock There should be product features that help avoid this problem, such as a backup battery. Issues like this cannot be avoided, but there must be a backup that is committed to paper in advance.
Issues, responsibility & redress Conclusions & next steps
Key findings
Most consumers feel that the risks associated with smart home technology outweigh the benefits, even though they may have some smart technology themselves. Interest in the use of smart technology is currently also related to the cost and value that these products/services offer, which is not so obvious to the average consumer. Consumers don't instinctively think about what data they're sharing, but when they do, they're concerned about the amount of data being collected.
Consumers are generally happy to share data about their lifestyle, but not data related to their physical safety and security. Consumers believe that information about smart technology is necessary to prevent problems in the first place.
The benefits are nice but some of the concerns are REALLY concerning."
I got over these concerns for the benefits. (deafblind
Key findings – emerging consumer profiles
Profiles of likely adopters
The ‘average
ScepticsAdopters
Rejecters feel strongly about the following
Issues, responsibility & redressBenefits and concerns
Conclusions & next steps
I understand the purposes and objectives of this event. The information provided was clear and easy to understand. They answered my questions clearly and appropriately. I felt welcome and felt that my contribution was respected and. I have had plenty of time to contribute my views. I will probably look for information on this topic in the future. In the future, I will probably buy smart technology for my home. It is important that the public can participate in discussions on topics such as Overall, I'm happy with this event. I understand how citizens will use the results of the event.
Really informative and friendly."
