Fan campaign consent and compliance briefing tool
Problem
A campaign gets planned in a messaging thread or a single meeting: a push notification offering a discount to attendees, a prediction game with a small prize, a loyalty challenge open to family members including under-eighteens. The CRM manager or marketing manager building it rarely checks which rules the campaign touches until something forces the question, an app store rejection, a data protection officer flagging it after the brief is signed off, or a legal review that takes a week because nobody wrote down what data the campaign collects or who it targets. Campaigns either launch without that check happening at all, or slip their date waiting on a legal team working from the same static policy document every time.
Product idea
A research tool built for the person planning the campaign, not the lawyer reviewing it afterwards. The marketer describes the campaign in a short structured form: channel, what data it collects, whether it targets or is likely to reach under-eighteen members, whether it involves a prize or purchase, and whether entry happens through the app or the website. The tool matches those facts against a fixed set of regimes, UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, the Age Appropriate Design Code where minors are involved, WCAG 2.2 where a digital surface is required, and marketing consent and opt-out rules, and returns a short briefing naming which apply and the open questions each one raises. It does not decide the campaign is compliant. It decides what legal needs to be asked.
Who it is for
CRM managers and marketing managers building the campaign, digital product managers responsible for the app surface it runs on, and the head of fan engagement who sponsors it and answers for what goes out to supporters.
Possible first version
A single web form capturing campaign channel, data collected, audience including whether under-eighteens are likely reached, prize or purchase involvement, and the digital surface used. A fixed rules table maps those answers to the relevant regimes and generates a briefing document naming each one and the questions it raises, exportable as PDF or shared as a link. Version one has no connection to the CRM or campaign management tool, no automated routing to legal or the data protection officer, and no record of past briefings; each one is a standalone document a marketer attaches to their campaign brief by hand.
- Build classification
- Micro-tool
- Rough effort
- 1-2 week prototype
- Roles involved
- CRM manager, Marketing manager, Digital product manager, Head of fan engagement
- Relevant to
- Professional club, League office, Women's league, Venue & stadium operator
- Systems in play
- CRM platforms, Mobile apps, Email and messaging platforms
- Product framing
- Research
Questions we get asked
Our legal team already reviews every campaign before it goes out. What does this add?
It does not replace that review. It changes what arrives at legal's desk: instead of a campaign idea with no detail attached, they get a briefing that already names the likely regimes and the specific facts that triggered each one. That is usually what slows a review down, not the review itself. Legal still makes the actual call.
Does this tell us whether a campaign is actually compliant?
No, and it is built not to. It flags which regimes are likely to apply given the facts entered and the questions each one raises, then stops. Whether a specific campaign meets the Age Appropriate Design Code or handles consent correctly is a judgement for your data protection officer or legal team, not something a form can certify.
What do we need to have ready before we can use this?
Nothing beyond the campaign details themselves, entered by hand into the form: what channel it runs on, what data it collects, whether under-eighteen members are likely to see it, whether a prize or purchase is involved. There is no data migration and no connection to your CRM or ticketing system to set up first. The rules table behind it does need someone, likely your data protection officer or legal counsel, to confirm the regime list and the questions attached to each one before it goes live.
Who keeps this current once it exists?
Legal or the data protection officer owns the regime list and the questions each one raises, and needs to revisit it when a rule changes or a new campaign type appears that the form does not cover well. Marketing owns using it as a first step before every campaign brief. If nobody updates the rules table, it quietly goes stale and starts giving marketers false confidence, which is worse than not having it.
Is this your workflow?
Tell us one sports workflow that still runs on paper, spreadsheets, WhatsApp or an outdated system. We will map it and show you what a simpler product looks like.
Tell us about itMore in Fan engagement & personalisation
- After-hours membership cancellation save lineA phone line that answers membership cancellation calls after hours, offers a pause or downgrade, and hands anyone who still wants to leave to a retention specialist with the reason already recorded.
- Email and push opt-out spike diagnosis assistantAn assistant that checks a campaign with an unusually high unsubscribe rate against past sends and shows which shared trait is the likely cause.
- Fan account chat concierge for loyalty and membership questionsA chat interface embedded in the app that answers a supporter's own account questions, loyalty points, renewal date, seat details, straight from their record, and escalates anything else to supporter services.