Giving existing Business Banking customers a digital way to update their contact details and marketing preferences — replacing a broken offline process and unlocking a significant data gap for the bank.
"If I want to update my email address, I either fill in a paper form or call them. So I just don't bother."
Lloyds Business Banking had a significant data problem: contact information for a large proportion of existing customers was either missing, incomplete, or years out of date. There was no self-serve digital way for business customers to update their contact details — if they wanted to make a change, they had to call customer service or complete a paper form.
Predictably, most didn't bother. The result was a growing gap between the customers the bank thought it could reach and the ones it actually could — with real consequences for regulatory communications, fraud alerts, and marketing reach across the business banking portfolio.
Beyond the data quality issue, the bank also lacked structured marketing consent from many of its business customers — limiting its ability to communicate relevant products and services to the businesses it served. The opportunity was clear: build a digital journey that fixed the data gap and collected meaningful opt-ins at the same time.
We decomposed the form into a one-question-at-a-time flow, logically sequenced to mirror how customers actually think about their contact information — personal details first, then communication preferences, then marketing choices. Each screen focused on a single decision, with clear labelling of what was required and what was optional.
Rather than burying marketing consent in regulatory language, we redesigned it as an explicit, honest offer. Plain-language descriptions explained what each channel would be used for, with specific examples. We gave customers granular control — by channel, not just a blanket yes/no — and made it clear they could change their mind at any time. Testing showed this approach increased opt-in rates while improving customer trust scores.
We worked with legal and compliance teams from the start of the project — not as a final review gate. This allowed us to find design solutions that met FCA requirements without sacrificing clarity. Where compliance required specific language, we isolated it in expandable detail sections rather than surfacing it as the primary content. Everything was signed off by legal before entering the design system.
For returning customers in periodic review journeys, we pre-populated fields with known information and surfaced only what had changed or needed reconfirmation. This dramatically reduced the perceived effort of the journey — customers who had completed it before reported that it felt "completely different" and "much quicker" even when the underlying data requirements were unchanged.
More customers beginning the journey — a direct result of reducing the visible complexity at entry and setting clearer expectations upfront.
Significantly fewer customers abandoning mid-flow — driven by the one-question-at-a-time structure and the removal of consent ambiguity.
Transparent, honest value exchange drove higher voluntary opt-in rates — without any dark patterns or pressure mechanics.