当商品の販売は、2011年07月19日を持ちまして終了しました。
Abstract
Following strong network coverage, enhanced security is the feature fleet managers across Western
Europe value most from their fuel card provider. This case profile assesses demand for advanced fuel
card security services and outlines how providers have responded to it. Furthermore, it recommends
which of the services should be offered and which segments they should be offered to.
Scope
- An examination of the trends that are driving growth in security services and are fostering
consumer demand for advanced security products.
- An assessment of which of the more innovative security features are valued by different segments
and how customer would like them to be implemented.
- A comparison of the core fleet card providers across Europe with regards to their card security
features.
Suggestions as to which security features should be offered, the markets they should be offered
in and the segments they should be offered to.
Report Highlights
There is a strong positive correlation between fleet size and the importance of vehicle-specific
analysis, while card insurance is the only security service to be more valued by the smaller fleet
operators. However, "Personal Identification Number" (PIN) codes are demanded by fleet
managers irrespective of their fleet size.
Large fleets value internet based security measures more than smaller fleets. This includes
e-mail based alerts which notify the fleet manager when drivers have made transactions or have
attempted to make transactions which are outside of pre-defined limits.
Repsol is the only supplier of those assessed to offer four of the six main limit or
parameter services. To provide two to three of these services is the norm. Furthermore, Repsol is
the only major provider which allows fuel card users to specify the days on which the card can be
used.
Reasons to Purchase
- Benchmark your fuel card security features against those of your competitors and identify key
areas of card improvement.
- Understand the fuel card security features valued by different customer segments and ensure
product development focuses on customers priority needs.
- Assess if card security features have influenced customers perception of their provider in terms
of the level of security offered.
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
- This case profiles investigates which security services are valued by different fleet segments
and advises on which of these services should be offered3
- Trends3
- Recommendations for card providers3
- Protection against fraud is a key requirement of a fuel card for customers, second only to high
network acceptance4
- The more innovative security services largely involve the implementation of technical features
and card limits/restrictions/parameters5
- Security is the area where most fuel card product innovation has occurred5
CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION 13
- This case profile assesses the demand for advanced fuel card security services and outlines how
providers have responded to it13
- This case profile comprises four further sections14
- Customer context14
- Implementation study14
- Seizing the innovation14
- Recommendations14
- This case profile focuses on a number of fuel card security services/features, for which
definitions can be found in the Appendix15
- Fuel card security services15
- Innovative fuel card security services15
- Fuel card security relevant services15
- This report is aimed at those needing a greater insight into customer requirements in the area
of fuel card security features16
- Strategists16
- Product development teams16
- Marketing and service managers16
CHAPTER 3 CUSTOMER CONTEXT 17
- Customer context17
- Protection against fraud is a key requirement of a fuel card for customers, second only to high
network acceptance18
- Following comprehensive network coverage, enhanced security is the core feature fleet managers
across Western Europe expect from their fuel card provider19
- Protection from employee fraud is almost as much as a concern to fleet managers as theft from an
external party20
- Analysis of the relationship between security features and fleet size reveals that exception
reporting and vehicle analysis become more important the larger the fleet size21
- The value of security relevant management tools is most pronounced among larger fleets22
- Fraud is rated as the most significant factor preventing non-users of fuel cards from converting
to this form of payment23
CHAPTER 4 IMPLEMENTATION STUDY 24
- Implementation study24
- The more innovative security services largely involve the implementation of technical features
and card limits / restrictions / parameters25
- There is a high variance in the importance of more innovative security services by segment, but
instant card stopping is highly valued by all26
- Large fleets value internet based security measures more than smaller fleets, partly because
they are more informed of features such as online authorisation27
- Regional differences in the value placed on security features are less pronounced28
- Customers are generally satisfied with online implementation of all innovative security
services29
- There are significant differences, by country, in how a transaction outside of the predefined
limits should be handled30
CHAPTER 5 SEIZING THE INNOVATION 31
- Seizing the innovation31
- Security is the area where most fuel card product innovation has occurred32
- Technical security features such as velocity checking and online authorisation are now very much
the norm33
- More innovative transaction parameters are slowly being added to the more established fuel value
and product limits34
- Shells card has the greatest number of security features35
- Repsol is the only major provider which allows fuel card users to specify the days on which the
card can be used36
- Customers are not always aware of the security features offered by their card37
- Arval compares poorly to the other suppliers in an analysis of instant online card stopping by
provider38
- Repsol and Arval are the suppliers with a weak penetration of PIN services into their customer
bases39
- UK suppliers lag behind in the implementation of chip and PIN40
- The number of services offered has some bearing on fleet manager ratings of their provider in
terms of the level of security their fuel card offers41
CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 42
- There are four key recommendations for fuel card providers hoping to alleviate their customers
security fears42
CHAPTER 7 APPENDIX 43
- Glossary of terms43
- Research methodology45
- Datamonitor European Fleet Managers Research, 200445
- Related research46
- SPP writing team46
List of Tables
- Table 1: Number of security services by provider33
- Table 2: Number of security limiting features by provider34
List of Figures
- Figure 1: Card PIN codes are the third most important fuel card feature19
- Figure 2: PIN codes are demanded by fleet managers irrespective of fleet size21
- Figure 3: A fear of fraud can dissuade non-users from subscribing to this form of payment23
- Figure 4: The three services in the upper right quadrant are highly valued by particular market
segments26
- Figure 5: There is a positive correlation between fleet size and the importance of instant
online card stopping and online authorisation27
- Figure 6: Southern European fleet managers value innovative security features the most28
- Figure 7: The preferred method of implementation is online, although indifference is apparent,
the smaller the fleet size29
- Figure 8: The majority of fleet managers in Southern European want transactions made outside of
limits to be refused30
- Figure 9: Number of security services by provider35
- Figure 10: Number of limiting features by provider36
- Figure 11: Based on customers understanding of what features their cards have, instant online
card stopping and velocity checking are the only two services with 60%+ penetration37
- Figure 12: 46.2% of Arval respondents have instant online card stopping as a service38
- Figure 13: 5.4% of Arval respondents said they have a PIN code for their card when the supplier
does not yet offer it39
- Figure 14: Those providers which offer 7 or more services score in excess of 3.75 out of 5 for
the level of security against external theft41
- Figure 15: European Fleet Managers Research, 2004 - Survey sample45
