The importance of brand relationship and trust in the Motor Insurance Industry

A recently conducted research study by Global Reviews in Q3 2018, pointed out that the biggest motivating factor for a consumer to choose a particular motor insurance brand in their initial stages of search is ‘trust’.

Continue reading

UK Banking Webinar Series: Learn from competitors’ mistakes

learn from santander mistakes

Over the past 12 months, Santander has been steadily losing prospective mortgage customers. They have gone from having a 12% preference rate amongst consumers, down to just 6%. Meanwhile, HSBC have recently increased to 16% and Nationwide is maintaining a strong lead with 23%.

Why are Santander losing so many potential customers and how can you learn from their mistakes?

A recent study with 150 consumers looking at website user experience across UK mortgage sites revealed that one of the reasons Santander is rating poorly is because their website is not working as strongly as other brands.

Our recent webinar looked at where along the online customer journey consumers are struggling to connect with Santander’s website. These insights will not only help you to avoid making these same mistakes, but also show you what the top performing brands from around the world are doing to ensure they aren’t losing prospective customers.

Presented by: Rebecca Jennings – Principal Client Advisor


Continue reading

How one Health Insurer took away the inherited customers of a competitor

Imagine you are looking for new private health insurance and start researching your options to find the best provider. You’re going to do some research across the internet, define a shortlist of insurance companies to eventually select the one that best meets your needs. Did you ever wonder what aspects of a website make your research either pleasant and quick or frustrating and unsuccessful – and ultimately influence your final choice?

Here at Global Reviews we didn’t just wonder, we found the answers. Our recent in-market study of Irish Health Insurance providers shows each provider has a different approach, and that some companies are much better at keeping prospect clients interested than others.

For example, Irish Life loses up to 71% of potential customers, while at Vhi only 29% of initially interested consumers ended up choosing a competitor. Despite the merger of Aviva and Glo Health into Irish Life Health the new brand is experiencing high lost opportunities rather than the capitalisation of their inheritance as one would have expected. Looking at these numbers, you can already guess who took that market share: Vhi. Let’s take a look at the different approaches.

Comparing the different providers with our unique research programme Fruition, we found out what businesses are doing well according to 200 potential customers and where the opportunities lie. Fruition helps to clarify the data we have gathered, calculating the lost opportunities brands are experiencing and identifying what problems are impacting conversions. Through thorough research, we were able to reveal what the main reasons are for consumers for choosing Health Insurance.

Health1Our study found that, after brand relationship, how products are promoted is key to deciding a final provider. The top 3 reasons for choosing a brand as a final preference are:

  • Good policy options (37%)
  • Best policies/ offers for my needs (36%)
  • I have used them before (35%)

Besides that, information that is easy to understand is the most important web element for health insurance sites. Vhi make it easier than other providers for consumers to find and understand their options. When it comes to web elements, we see Vhi scores above the average. Respondents said they chose their final preference because:

  • plans were easy to understand (average: 26%/ Vhi: 30%)
  • website is easy to understand and use (average: 23%/ Vhi: 24%)
  • easy to find rates and charges (average: 15%, Vhi 17%)

So how do they do it?

Vhi manage to identify a customer’s needs when providing a quote. They offer a quote tool that determines one’s needs and matches a plan to suit the person best. The tool asks about the type of cover, age and important requirements such as physiotherapy, preferred hospital cover and type of rooms. Rather than having to guess what might be included in a particular level of cover, visitors are provided with this information. Consumers who preferred Vhi also found it easier to compare different types of cover when matching their needs.


CES (Customer Effect Scores): How much effort did this website make you put in to complete the task required? (The closer to 0 the better) JTE (Judging The Experience): This website makes it easy to help me research options and decide to purchase health insurance with this provider (the higher the score the better)

It is evident that consumers find it easy to match a product to their needs through comparison tables. However, not every comparison table is necessarily great. There has to be specific information, features and functions available to make the comparison table a good one. Learned from best practice there is knowledge available to which of these features and functions are essential when implementing a comparison table to the customer journey:

  1. Make it easy to find. Consumers will search for a product comparison on your website, ranking ‘making the comparison page easy to find’ as one of the top 10 most important elements when looking for a product or service.
  2. Make it easy to read without leaving out important information. Information which is hard to read and understand can be a big reason for consumers to end their journey on your website. Therefore, answering all the possible questions that consumers may ask is important to keep visitors on your website.
  3. Have specific details and functions available. Let consumers know what the product/service can be used for, who is eligible, what they will get from the product/service
  4. Make the table simple and easy to understand. In the table, price points should be displayed along with content to clearly explain that the price is an estimate only where applicable. This demonstrates transparency which in turn helps gaining the trust of the customer.

To find out more about our Health Insurance study or how Fruition could help your business, contact our Commercial Director Hannah-Rose Farrington.

Global Reviews specialises in helping top brands worldwide convert more of their ideal customers online, through the use of the most advanced research methodologies. To find out more about how we can help you and your digital teams, or if your brand would like to be included in our next round of FRUITION research, please contact: 

Hannah-Rose Farrington – Commercial Director
T:         +44 (0) 203725 8260
M:        +353 (87) 1263043



Continue reading

How to optimise cross-sales conversion: a new solution (webinar)

Global Reviews is delighted to announce the launch of SHARE OF WALLET, a unique data and insights solution that helps your digital and marketing teams to understand the opportunities for a cross-buy experience for desktop, mobile, mobile app and public websites.

Global Reviews evaluated five banks in Australia and their audit scores show that they currently achieve between 27% and 57% cross sell success. We were curious to find out why they lost their existing customers, who are looking for another product they offer, to a different brand.

We evaluated the current experience and offering of key brands cross-selling within their digital assets and identified best practice in this area across all their products.

Share of Wallet measures:

  • How many existing customers, who are in market for another product, you are losing to a competitor that you could and should have won
  • Why your cross sales experience didn’t encourage your customers to buy and to which competitor you lost them to
  • The quality and effectiveness of the experience you are providing online with real world conversion metrics

This analysis creates understanding of the competitor and market forces that are influencing purchasing decisions and identifies what changes you need to make to your site and app to impact conversions.

Some examples of best practice we discovered during our research:

  • Promote complementary products within content, with a solution approach (consider scenarios or personas)
  • Utilise customer data to provide detailed examples of their potential opportunities (borrowing capabilities, repayments, loan type)
  • Give the customer the opportunity to buy or find out more – Don’t forget to plant the seed for later


To see more research results and find out more about Share of Wallet, sign up to our webinar of Thursday 6 April 2017, 9am GMT

SoW webinarGlobal Reviews specialises in helping top brands worldwide convert more of their ideal customers online, through the use of the most advanced research methodologies. To find out more about how we can help you and your digital teams, or if your brand would like to be included in our next round of Share of Wallet research, please contact: 

Hannah-Rose Farrington – Commercial Director
T:         +44 (0) 203725 8260
M:        +353 (87) 1263043

Continue reading

Find out why Irish Health Insurers lose on average 62% of prospect customers

Global Reviews discovered that various Health Insurance providers in Ireland are seriously struggling to win clients, with some losing 71% or even up to 83% of prospect customers (Irish Life, Aviva). But the differences we found between brands in our recent in-market study of Health Insurance providers in Ireland are huge: Ireland’s most popular health insurer only loses 29% of potential customers (Vhi). Though significantly lower, this loss should not be ignored, considering these 29% lost clients all had Vhi as their initial preference, but chose another insurer after comparing plans of competitors.

As it gets easier and faster for consumers to compare and shop around for their health care needs, health insurers need to step up their game and make sure their prospect clients aren’t lured away by a competitor.

Comparing the different providers with our unique research programme Fruition, we found out what businesses do well according to 200 potential customers and where the opportunities lie. We discovered what can be done to win these initially interested customers over.

lost opportunitiesFruition helps to make all the data we collected more understandable, calculates lost opportunities and shows what impacts conversion. Through thorough research, we were able to reveal what the main reasons are for consumers in deciding which Health Insurance to go with.

On average, the main drivers consumers based their final preferences on, are:

40% Reputable brand
35% Plans are easy to understand
32% Website is easy to understand and use

We noticed another trend that impacts customer conversion as well: the increasing popularity of particular third party websites, which allows consumers to compare plans of all the different brands. 38% of the participants surveyed between January and March this year, found information through these sites, which is 8% more than in June 2015.

With Aviva Health Insurance and Glo Health being sold to Irish Life, another recent development showed up in our data, as many customers who would have preferred Aviva or Glo, became prospect clients for other health insurance companies.

We will share our unique market-specific insights on best practice in conversion optimisation for Health Insurance during our webinar on Wednesday 29 March at 10 am GMT.

Sign up to our webinar and find out:

– What are the lost opportunities for Health Insurance providers
– What drives customers to choose a Health Insurance brand
– Which provider was a customers’ favourite after Aviva’s and Glo’s exit from the market place

Global Reviews specialises in helping top brands worldwide convert more of their ideal customers online, through the use of the most advanced research methodologies. To find out more about how we can help you and your digital teams, or if your brand would like to be included in our next round of FRUITION research, please contact: 

Hannah-Rose Farrington – Commercial Director
T:         +44 (0) 203725 8260
M:        +353 (87) 1263043


Continue reading

Leading sports betting brands losing on average 74% potential customers

Leading sports betting brands losing on average 74% potential customers

Leading online sports betting providers are losing between 66% and 84% of their potential customers during their online orientation, results found in a recent study by Global Reviews.

In a fast-paced market where competitors could easily snap up a customer that should be yours, it’s key to understand what drives clients to choose a brand.

So why are online sports betting providers losing target online customers that they should be winning?

sports betting lost opp

Betting options that are easy to understand is one of the key drivers for potential bettors. This might seem obvious, yet we discovered that the majority of providers do not offer enough clarity at this key stage of the journey and as a result see prospective customers placing their bets elsewhere.

From the five leading brands in the UK, William Hill outshines its competitors by losing the least customers during their research phase. However, with a loss of 66% of prospects there are still huge opportunities to win more of these customers.

With our unique research programme, Fruition, we uncovered the reasons why.

We observed 360 regular bettors who researched over 32 sports betting providers during the discover stage of the journey, who then narrowed it down to a shortlist of preferred brands and ultimately a final preference.

We conducted a detailed analysis of the five most popular brands of those surveyed, outlining what impacts their success online and how well the providers are doing in-comparison to their competitors.

To find out what best practice in betting options looks like watch our webinar with exclusive insights that will help to optimise conversion.

  • What lost opportunities cause even The Big 5 to lose customers?
  • What are customers’ key drivers when choosing a provider?
  • Who’s losing customers to whom?

Global Reviews specialises in helping top brands worldwide convert more of their ideal customers online, through the use of the most advanced research methodologies. To find out more about how we can help you and your digital teams, or if your brand would like to be included in our next round of FRUITION research, please contact: 

Hannah-Rose Farrington – Commercial Director
T:         +44 (0) 203725 8260
M:        +353 (87) 1263043

Continue reading

How investing in a personalised online quote tool for life insurance can help to improve customer experience

Recent Global Reviews research which looked at the Digital Sales Effectiveness of the Life Insurance industry in both the UK and Australia revealed that the majority of providers are scoring below average. According to our in-depth research around customer experience in the life insurance industry, the ability to receive a well-tailored, easy to understand and personalised quote is of major importance. Scoring an average of 8.5 for the UK market and an 8.3 for the Australian market (on a scale of 1-10) for customer needs.

Top Needs

Through advanced research methodologies, Global Reviews found that the UK Life Insurance market scored rather low, 53% for the quote tool tailoring features while the Australian market scored substantially higher with 81%. When it came to ‘understanding the quote’, the UK life insurance market scored on average 48% with the Australian market scoring 67%.

UK AU Average

If the UK and the Australia are to be compared, the UK can certainly learn from the features the Australian market has introduced. We looked at top performers on personalised quotes within the Australian life insurance industry and the top performer of the UK in that same category.

RACQ and Coles are the top performing brands in the Australian life insurance market when it comes to a well-tailored and easy to understand quote. RACQ scores 82% on quote tailoring features and 79% on understanding the quote with Coles scoring 91% and 73% respectively.

The features that add to the strength of these top performing quote tools are:


  • Policy additions are listed with a price.
  • The quote includes a reference number.



  • Summary of key information.
  • There is a clear breakdown of what the price covers.



  • Customers are told whether the quote results are ‘estimates only’ or actual.
  • Quote results link to detailed explanation of the product.

In the UK market, Legal & General scored highest, with 82% on ‘tailoring the quote’ and 60% for ‘understanding the quote’. This is an exceptional result taking into consideration that the average UK score is 53% for ‘tailoring a quote’ and 48% for ‘understanding the quote’.  What is Legal & General doing to achieve high scores?

As part of Global Reviews rigorous research programme multiple features and functions of the quote tool are tested. Our research revealed that Legal & General’s quote tool is tailorable and flexible. The quote gives customers the option to add extra items to their insurance policy. In addition, every policy is listed with a price, and the price is then automatically updated with every adjustment. Another feature that makes Legal & General stand out an easy comparison table for the key insurance products which helps customers to compare options and easily understand the quote. Life Insurance providers across the globe would stand to differentiate themselves and create a better customer experience simply by helping customers through the quote tool, helping them to compare and understand options.




Continue reading

Superannuation websites aren’t delivering on the customers’ top needs

Written by Justin van Vliet

When asking prospective superannuation customers to rate the most important features while researching for a superannuation provider, the top three responses all revolved around information; information about account fees and charges, information that is easy to understand, and information about investment fee and charges. However, not all superannuation websites are delivering on these needs.

Most important elements on a website when researching superannuation online

important superannuation information

Despite the highest rated information feature being around account fees and charges, Australian superannuation providers are only averaging a score of 38% when it comes to displaying this information on their websites. Of the brands measured, only CareSuper and Equipsuper scored above 40% for this area.

Benchmark scores for feature and functions around fees/charges information

fees and charges scores

The reason why the industry scores significantly low within this area comes down to the use of oversimplified tables used to present fees and charges information. As a result, there is vital information that is missing. The most commonly missing information from company websites are; information on how fees are charged, the frequency and amount of the charges, and basic explanations around the fees. This lack of information presented on their website is the only area that the lowest scoring companies have in common.

Of the brands measured,the companies scoring lower than industry average here are BT, ANZ Super and ING Direct.

So what is it that these companies are lacking and what can they do to improve?

BT, who only scored 10% for fees and charges information, is missing out on at least two features. Firstly, fees and charges are not as clearly labelled as “fees” etc. – meaning that consumers have to work harder to find this information. Secondly, the home/landing page does not have content or a link around ongoing monthly/yearly fees.  BT is the only company that was benchmarked that is currently missing this feature on their webpage.

Whilst ANZ Super and ING Direct have all the features mentioned above, they still have areas where they are lacking and therefore pulling down their scores. Even though ING Direct is the best overall performer within this industry, the website does not score well regarding information on account fees & charges. When comparing ING and ANZ Super in displaying information about fees and charges, their content is similar, but their presentation differs.

ANZ Super – fees and charges informationanz-feesING Direct – fees and charges information ing-direct-super-fees

ING Direct and ANZ Super both scored 30% thanks to both including the same features on their sites. The difference between the two, however, is the way in which they display the information. ING Direct has opted for an accordion approach, which when all the sections are open, result in a longer page using a lot of space, meanwhile ANZ Super uses less space by condensing, and missing out on, critical fee information.

A company that is doing well regarding displaying information about both account and investment fees and charges is CareSuper. CareSuper scored 60%, 22% higher than the industry average for this area. The driver behind the higher score lies within the added content that is presented within the fees and charges table on their website. The table explains the type of fee, the amount, and the frequency of the fee charges. Furthermore, the page also provides an explanation above the table, and a call to action for help if needed. The page also indicates how account fees are charged along with the capability to compare fees to other superannuation funds, the date of when fees/charges are effective, and the terms and conditions surrounding the fees.

CareSuper – fees and charges information


Two companies that are new to the Global Reviews Digital Effectiveness Benchmark study are EquipSuper and Cbus, both of which scored higher than the industry average for the area around fees and charges information. Equipsuper scored 50% and Cbus 40% for their fees and charges information. The features that cause these strong positive scores for EquipSuper is the inclusion of contextual FAQS/a link to FAQs relevant to account fees, in addition to contextual contact details relevant to account fees.

As with BT, Cbus fails to clearly label the fees/charges and display the information ‘above the fold’. However, their score is held up by features that most other companies do not include on their account detail page which is the inclusion of content or link around how fees are charged, and the display of terms/conditions relating to the fees.

Although the majority of the companies within this industry are unfortunately scoring 40% or below for information around fees and charges, there are some quick wins that can help boost the industry average. By making minor changes such as adding more context and detail, this would help to drastically increase the score, the industry average, and ultimately help satisfy more customer needs.

Continue reading

Does the tertiary sector consumer experience meet the grade?

Tertiary student research

If we equate the tertiary sectors consumer website experience for future domestic students with the academic grading in Australia, it would receive a ‘C’. So with an industry average Digital Sales Effectiveness (DSE) score of 55%, it’s a ‘Pass’ – but only just!

20 of Australia and New Zealand’s University and Tafe colleges were assessed in November 2014 to understand the experience they offer prospective students during the research and consider phase of their journey and to a lesser extent, through to the application process (for post graduate or direct study).

We know the process of selecting the correct course and institution can be overwhelming and confusing, which is perhaps why prospects feel they need tools to assist them in selecting the right course (NB: 92% rate this as important to extremely important). It is therefore surprising that university websites aren’t taking advantage to direct prospects into appropriate study, rather than being a passive source of course information. In fact, the industry is only offering an overall experience for this category (Matching courses to needs) at 46%. Institutions however, are providing better assistance around pathways to study with a higher average at 67% (for category ‘Pathways to the university’). Our audit of features and functions that allow prospects to match needs came in at a staggering low of 32% with 13 of the 20 under the average.

The question that remains is: does the experience offered online influence prospects’ opinions of the universities they navigate?

In a recent mobile experience study by Global Reviews, we found that 27% find that a bad experience makes the company look unprofessional, with 25% indicating that it makes them doubt the quality and service of the company’s product or service offerings. 13% even went to the length of saying they feel that the company is not valuing their time as important, by not putting more emphasis on a good experience. What is clear is that a poor experience will stop many prospects in their tracks and push them off the site, often onto competitor websites.

Learn more about how this industry meets prospective student expectations in our recent whitepaper.

Continue reading

Starting a savings account suffers from separate sales silos

Author: Jeremy Weinstein

It would seem strange that in the year 2014 businesses would count sales from different channels differently. I understand that a business needs to know where sales are coming from and as such need to track the efficacy of each channel, and I also understand that the cost of acquisition from the web site is likely to be less than that of the call centre – but what’s the cost of losing the sale altogether?

The most recent results from Global Review’s Digital Sales Effectiveness (DSE) Benchmark, collected last month on the banking industry, showed that savings accounts are the worst at ‘Channel Selection’. This is the stage in the customer journey where, after careful consideration, a customer has finally decided to act on opening an account. At this point, the benchmark assesses how well a company reveals the various options available to apply – in the case of savings accounts the industry average is only 49%.

It appears that the different banks’ web teams have not done enough in revealing all the possible options to a customer interested in opening an account, scoring just 43% for ‘Revealing Options’. Moreover, banks’ web sites are 10% worse at explaining the offline options (46%) when compared to explaining the online options (56%). The good news is that the industry has improved slightly from 6 months ago when in explaining the offline options, with the industry average up 5%. But this is just the beginning, there’s still a long way to go.

Couple this data with the Digital Marketing Effectiveness (DME) Study, run in the same period, that showed 53% of customers still say they use the website for research but prefer to open an account over the phone or in a branch.

Comparing the Australian market to its UK counterpart actually makes the result look good scoring 36% for the ‘Channel Selection’ stage overall and 33%, 40% and 35% for revealing options, explaining offline options and explaining online options respectively. What’s even more surprising about the UK result is the lack of information about applying online when the customer is already in the online channel.

Looking at this situation optimistically, it’s possible that the poor ‘Channel Selection’ result is an anomaly, or perhaps just an oversight by banks that neglected to inform the different ways to open an account. Alternatively, it could be that the web team is competing with the call centre for sales – or the mobile team or the branches for that matter. No, it couldn’t be. Could it?! In the year 2014 banks (and other institutions) have surely matured beyond the early days of channel silos and realised that a sale, no matter how it comes, is still better than no sale at all. Surely?!

For more information about how to improve the channel selection experience, read more about our Digital Sales Effectiveness Benchmark or please contact:

Ché Carbis
Senior Commercial Director
T: +61 3 9982 3419
M: +61 411 962 857

Continue reading