What surprised you most?
"What immediately struck me was how differently organisations define personalisation. For some, sending two versions of an email is personalisation; for others, it's fully automated one-to-one customer journeys. But beneath those differences lay the same question everywhere: how do we make personalisation work in practice, and not just in PowerPoint?
And here's the interesting thing: almost no one sees technology as the biggest obstacle. The real barriers lie with people, in the structure of the organisation, in unclear ownership and in the culture.
Let's start with data. What did you hear about that in the group?
Everyone has a huge amount of data. The challenge is not collecting it, but determining which data is truly relevant. You don't always need a 360-degree view of the customer. Sometimes 270 degrees is enough to be very effective.
Another major misconception is that everything has to be real-time. That's not necessary. Context is more important than speed. And quality is more important than volume. Someone said something very powerful: 'I'd rather work with 50% reliable data than 90% data I don't trust.' That hits the nail on the head. Relevance disappears as soon as customers lose trust.
What about processes? That is often underestimated.
"Many teams still think in terms of campaigns: set up, plan, launch. But if you move towards hyper-personalisation, the process becomes a living system. You no longer send out fixed content, you orchestrate decisions.
And that's exciting, but also risky. People want explanations. They want to know why the system chooses option A and not B. Many organisations are not yet ready to hand over that control entirely to automation And that's okay. No one says it has to happen right away. But you do have to start testing now if you ever want to get there.
Technology is often seen as complex. Was that also the case here?
“The landscape is complex, but technology is not the bottleneck. Most organisations already have powerful tools: CDPs, CRMs, orchestration engines. The problem is overlap, unclear ownership and the lack of someone to oversee everything.
Besides, the real question is not: what can our tools do? but: who decides what they should do? And that requires making choices: which system does what. Personally, I strongly believe in a separate orchestration solution. You need central logic and central decision-making to properly coordinate channels and timing. In many projects, we help customers simplify their infrastructure. Over the years, many separate systems have been added, often without a clear strategic architecture.
And then there's the human factor. You mentioned that as the biggest barrier.
"Yes, and everyone agreed on that. When asked: where does personalisation really get stuck? Everyone pointed to the human side. People. Organisations. Internal politics. KPIs that work against each other. Short-term pressure on sales that undermines long-term relevance.
No one knew who really 'owned' the customer. No one had a shared understanding of what 'good for the customer' meant. And without that, even the best data and technology are irrelevant.
What does an organisation need to break through this?
“Central orchestration. No hero, no single owner, but a structure in which teams agree on principles, priorities and frameworks. Where someone is responsible for the mandate behind customer communication: what do we send, when do we do it, and why is it relevant?
If you don't regulate this, personalisation will always reflect internal silos rather than real customer needs.”
During the roundtable, the word 'personalisation' itself was also discussed. What was the issue there?
"That was interesting. Many participants said that they don't really like the word 'personalisation' because it sounds like a marketing ploy. Words such as relevance and value appealed to them much more. Someone said: 'Personalisation is a marathon, not a sprint.' I thought that was powerful. You build intelligence, trust and orchestration step by step. It doesn't happen overnight.
The technology is there. The data is there. Processes can be built. The only real question is: are people ready for it? When organisations align structure, ownership and mindset, hyper-personalisation becomes not only possible, but also profitable. Because relevance is not a marketing choice. It is a financial strategy.
Would you like more information about hyper-personalisation? Feel free to contact Fred at fred.vanwesterop@therelevance.group or send our Client Consultant Patrick a message.
info@markteffect.nl 
Back to the website
