Changing Customer Experience – Device Sharing with Control

5 Dec 2019

Recently, I was having some email issues with my O365 Exchange account access from my Windows/Outlook PC. On one of my calls, a technician asked if he could check my email settings with a screen sharing viewer. To my initial surprise, he invited me to a Zoom conference and used the Zoom features to look at my email (there were no issues, surprise). After thinking about it, using the Zoom screen sharing was logical for what he needed to do.

In August, I was at the Glance conference and heard about their products for enhanced co-browsing. I find these solutions to be of great value in our ever increasingly online structured world. While those of us in technology and the majority of millennials have grown up with the technology, there is a large population that is still intimidated by the challenges. Co-browsing enable focused assistance in a range of online engagement processes and applications.

However, after seeing Zoom used in a similar application, I wondered how to differentiate the Glance co-browsing offers from the features Zoom offers in the Video/UCaaS platform. In reading through this article in American Banker magazine about how Axos bank is using Glance to significantly improve customer satisfaction, what is clear is the level of integration into the business process seems much higher in the Axos deployment. The article discusses how the Glance integration allows the banker to see the screen of the customer and to highlight on-screen elements to guide the navigation of the customer – but Glance does not give the banker the capability to remotely control the customer’s machine, manipulate browser settings or system settings, enter data, or otherwise directly execute transactions on behalf of the customer. The solution also enables blocking key information from being displayed to the agent, reducing the potential of data fraud. It also discusses how it is integrating web page access to the agent. One key driver is Axos focus on Internet banking. While Axos has $11B in assets, it only has three actual physical branches. The focus on online customers completing complex transactions is the normal process and co-browsing is very helpful in assisting in completing complex transactions remotely.

There are a range of tools that enable sharing of device capabilities across the internet. Basic WebRTC service include screen sharing, essentially sending the screen as a video. In an app, adding remote keyboard/mouse controls enables shared control and a level of co-browsing. However, without a range of integrated controls and restrictions, the tool can be misused. It is important to remember that one of the biggest online scams is getting into your PC with a co-browser and opening it up to malware and infection. For consumers concerned with this and companies reducing their liability for rogue employees, a tightly integrated set of limitation and capabilities are critical. According to Verizon, 28 percent of internet breaches are from internal sources and IBM indicates another 27 percent of data breaches are caused by human error.

Clearly, internal staff are responsible for about 50% of current internet fraud and breaches. As the industry moves rapidly forward to embracing these device sharing tools in customer service solutions, the potential consequences for fraud and abuse have yet to be seen. Co-browsing or screen sharing tools can be powerful solutions for increasing customer satisfaction, but the risk of their misuse is equally high or potentially even higher. The impact of fraud and data loss breaches are huge. Loss of customer trust can be even higher in long term business impact. As we move forward in the customer experience industry into using these tools as part of the business process of customer engagement, we must assure that they are not used maliciously or carelessly. Indeed, talking to Glance, they find their visual engagement solutions typically clear SECOPS reviews easily while other screen share solutions with less process integration features and less precise control over user provisioning cannot accommodate the security and privacy policies of financial, medical and insurance companies.

For any organization looking to deploy these tools to facilitate a business process, an analysis of the risks the tools could pose if misused should be included. Analysis that pre-supposes a rogue employee and analyzes what they could do with the tools for fraud or other malicious uses is a good step. This type of analysis should reveal if the tools and integrated application controls that companies like Glance are implementing are more appropriate than a generic screen sharing application for business use.


There are currently no comments on this article.

You must be a registered user to make comments