Skip to content

Part 3 of 7 · Abandoned form recoverer series ~6 min read

How the basis gets decided

This is the post that matters. Everything else in this system is plumbing, and this is the part that determines whether the thing you have built is useful or is a way of emailing people who did not ask to be emailed.

Key takeaways

  • The field label determines the purpose. “Where shall we send your quote?” is specific.
  • How far through matters: somebody at step four of five was clearly transacting.
  • Two clear ends: a labelled address deep in a transactional form, and a footer newsletter box.
  • The arguable middle exists, and the honest handling is to decline it.
  • Where a person is already a customer, the question is different and usually easier.

The label decides

The single most useful principle here: what an address may be used for is determined by what the person was told when they typed it, not by what the business would like to do with it. That is both the legal shape of it in most regimes and the shape most people would recognise as fair.

Field labelWhat it permitsVerdict
“Where shall we send your quote?”Sending them that quoteContactable about this
“Your email (so we can confirm the booking)”Confirming that bookingContactable
“Email” on a multi-step enquiryResponding to the enquiryUsually contactable
“Get our newsletter”Sending the newsletter, if confirmedNot contactable about this
“Email” in a footer box, no contextNothing, without a confirmationNot contactable
A field they filled during checkoutThe transactionContactable, narrowly

The third row is the common case and the one worth thinking about. A bare “Email” field in the middle of a multi-step enquiry form carries its context from the form around it: somebody filling in a bathroom quote request understands what the address is for. A bare “Email” field in a footer carries no context at all.

How far through

How the basis for contacting an abandoner is decidedA vertical chain of five steps entered by a box labelled An abandonment, with an address. Step one asks whether the field was labelled with a purpose; if not it exits to Do not contact, because there was no stated purpose. Step two asks whether they got far enough through, past the halfway step; if not it exits to Do not contact, because they barely started. Step three asks whether they are already a customer with an existing relationship; if so it exits to Contactable, on a different and easier basis. Step four asks whether they have withdrawn before, checking the consent record from Day 105; if so it exits to Do not contact, ever, for any reason. Step five concludes that one message is defensible, and one only. A note says four gates, three of which say no, and most abandonments do not reach the last box.AWS ACCOUNTAn abandonmentwith an addressWas the field labelled?with a purposeDo not contactno stated purposenoFar enough through?past the halfway stepDo not contactthey barely startednoAlready a customer?an existing relationshipContactablea different and easier basisyesWithdrawn before?ask the consent keeperConsent recordfrom Day 105Do not contactever, for any reasonyesOne message is defensibleand one onlyFour gates, three of which say no. Most abandonments do not reach the last box.
Fig 1. The basis check in full. Three of the four gates decline, which is why most abandonments produce nothing at all.
  • App integration
  • Machine learning
  • Security & identity
  • Front-end & mobile

Past the halfway step

Somebody who entered their email on step one of five and stopped has expressed interest in the way that clicking a link expresses interest. Somebody who reached step four has spent several minutes providing specific information about a specific job, which is a materially different act.

Halfway is a rule of thumb rather than a principle, and the useful version of it is: did they give you enough that a reply would be about their actual situation rather than a generic prompt? If the message can only say “you started a form”, the basis is thin. If it can say “you were most of the way through a quote for a bathroom in Ashford”, the person will recognise it as a continuation of something they were doing.

Existing customers

A much easier case and worth separating explicitly. Somebody who has bought from you before, abandoning a form on your site, is in an existing relationship and the question of whether you may email them about something they were evidently trying to do is not a difficult one.

It is still one message, and it still respects any withdrawal. The difference is that the label and step-depth gates matter less, because the basis comes from the relationship rather than from the form.

The arguable middle, and what to do with it

The three bands of contact basis and how the middle is handledA horizontal row of five boxes. Clearly fine: a labelled field, deep in the form, an existing customer. Clearly not: a footer box with one field. Arguable: step two of five with a bare label. The temptation: the phrase we could justify it. Decline it: and record why. A note says we could probably justify it is the sentence to treat as a no.THE MIDDLE IS WHERE THE JUDGEMENT ISClearly finelabelled, deep, customerClearly notfooter box, one fieldArguablestep 2 of 5, bare labelThe temptation'we could justify it'Decline itand record why"We could probably justify it" is the sentence to treat as a no.
Fig 2. The three bands and the rule for the middle one. The phrase in the note is a reliable signal that the answer should be no.
  • App integration
  • Machine learning
  • Security & identity
  • Management

The arguable band is real and it is where every implementation of this drifts over time, one reasonable-sounding widening at a time. The practical defence is to make declining the default for the middle band and to require an explicit configuration change, with a recorded reason, to move a form out of it.

That reason then sits in the configuration where whoever asks about it later can read it, which is a much better position than reconstructing a decision from a threshold somebody moved eighteen months ago.

Next: what the one message says.

All posts