{"id":13565,"date":"2026-04-01T13:05:22","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T13:05:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fluid-solutions.dk\/?p=13565"},"modified":"2026-06-12T11:19:54","modified_gmt":"2026-06-12T11:19:54","slug":"marketing-consent-preference-management","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fluid-solutions.dk\/en\/marketing-consent-preference-management\/","title":{"rendered":"Marketing Consent & Preference Management \u2013 create real value"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n
\n\t
\n\t\t

Marketing Consent & Preference Management (MCPM) has become a central focus area for companies that want to combine compliance with effective data-driven marketing.<\/p>\n

But the market is complex, and many companies are navigating a landscape of overlapping technologies, unclear responsibilities and fragmented data.<\/p>\n

The result is often the same: lack of overview, limited activation and increased compliance risk.<\/p>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div><\/div>\n
\n\t
\n\t\t

1. The MCPM landscape is more complex than many realise
\n<\/strong><\/h3>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div><\/div>\n
\n\t
\n\t\t

When we look at the MCPM market, it is not one type of solution \u2013 but an ecosystem of different technologies with different purposes. Overall, the landscape can be divided into four categories:<\/p>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div><\/div>\n
\n\t
\n\t\t
    \n
  1. Specialised MCPM platforms: <\/strong>Platforms designed as a central consent and preference master across systems and channels. Examples: RubiqCloud, OneTrust, PossibleNow<\/li>\n
  2. Data and activation platforms (CDP): <\/strong>Focus on gathering and activating customer data \u2013 but not on consent as a core function. Examples: Segment, Tealium, Snowflake<\/li>\n
  3. CRM and marketing systems: <\/strong>Contain consent fields, but handle consent in a decentralised way and often without governance. Examples: Salesforce, Dynamics, Agillic<\/li>\n
  4. Custom-built solutions: <\/strong>Internal databases, Excel sheets and bespoke solutions with added complexity and risk.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
    <\/div><\/div>\n
    \n\t
    \n\t\t

    The point is important: Most companies are already using several of these, but without a central consent layer.<\/p>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

    <\/div><\/div>\n
    \n\t
    \n\t\t

    2. The problem is not a lack of systems \u2013 but a lack of coherence<\/strong><\/h3>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
    <\/div><\/div>\n
    \n\t
    \n\t\t

    Many organisations believe they \u201chave control over consent\u201d because it exists in their existing systems. But in practice, consents are often:<\/p>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

    <\/div><\/div>
    \n