From Conversion to Trust: The Next Phase of CRM & Customer Loyalty

From 1 July 2026, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will roll out the next phase of its Scams Prevention Framework (SPF), placing greater responsibility on businesses to actively prevent scams. Part of this includes encouraging brands to adopt registered Branded Sender IDs for SMS, with unregistered messages increasingly treated as unverified. On the surface, this looks like a compliance update. In reality, it’s a forcing function for something much bigger: a fundamental rethink of how CRM operates in a market where trust is under pressure.

We’re operating in a trading environment that is becoming progressively more difficult. Consumer confidence remains fragile, discretionary spend is tightening, and growth is no longer as easily won. In response, many brands have done what feels logical in the short term — they’ve pushed harder. More campaigns, more urgency, more offers, more frequency. CRM has become louder, more aggressive, and more transactional, not just in how often we communicate, but in the tone and tactics used to drive conversion.

At the same time, scammers are doing exactly the same thing. They are targeting vulnerable consumers with urgency-led messaging, mimicking legitimate brands, and exploiting trust in channels like SMS and email. The uncomfortable truth is that the tactics used by high-performing CRM teams today are often indistinguishable from the tactics used by scammers to manipulate behaviour. Over the last decade, we’ve trained teams to optimise for conversion at all costs — increasing urgency, deepening personalisation, removing friction, and leaning heavily into the channels that deliver the strongest immediate results. When viewed through a different lens, those same tactics no longer just represent effective marketing; they mirror the mechanics of deception.

This is where the risk begins to emerge. The more “high performing” a CRM program is today, the more likely it is to create unintended consequences tomorrow. A browse abandonment email that feels a little too specific, an SMS that demands immediate action, or a perfectly timed “last chance” message can all drive results in the short term. But in the wrong context, or when overused, these tactics can begin to feel intrusive, manipulative, or even suspicious. In the hands of a scammer, they become powerful tools. In the hands of a brand, they can quietly erode trust.

And this is the real issue — not compliance, but trust. Trust operates on two distinct but interconnected levels: trust in the brand, and trust in the channel. Customers are not analysing campaign strategy or segmentation logic; they are making instinctive, split-second judgments. Does this feel like the brand I know? Does this message feel legitimate? Do I trust where this is coming from? If the answer to any of these questions is uncertain, performance is immediately impacted.

This is particularly evident in email, a channel many organisations still consider “safe.” In practice, it is often where trust is most easily undermined. Inconsistent templates across campaigns, varying sender names, designs that shift week to week, transactional emails that bear no resemblance to marketing communications, and fluctuating tone all contribute to a fragmented experience. Individually, these inconsistencies may appear minor. Collectively, they create doubt. Each inconsistency introduces a moment of hesitation, and that hesitation is where trust begins to erode. Once a customer pauses to question whether a message is genuine, the effectiveness of not just that communication, but future communications, begins to decline.

The same applies to SMS, where the stakes are even higher. As one of the most immediate and trusted channels, SMS has historically delivered strong performance. However, it is also one of the most heavily exploited channels by scammers. As regulatory scrutiny increases, brands will need to be far more deliberate in how they use it. Overuse, poor targeting, or messaging that feels overly urgent or ambiguous will not just underperform — it will contribute to a broader degradation of trust in the channel itself.

Once trust in a channel is compromised, the impact compounds. Open rates soften, click behaviour becomes more cautious, and customers begin to disengage. What was once a highly efficient, low-cost channel becomes increasingly expensive and less reliable. This is why trust should not be viewed as a soft, brand-led metric. It is a commercial multiplier. It directly influences conversion efficiency, frequency tolerance, and long-term customer value. Brands that maintain trust can communicate more effectively, more often, and with greater impact. Those that erode it face diminishing returns, regardless of how aggressive their tactics become.

The introduction of the SPF is therefore not just about reducing scams; it is about forcing organisations to confront how their own behaviours contribute to a broader erosion of trust. Many will approach this as a compliance exercise — updating policies, adjusting processes, and ensuring they meet minimum requirements. But this misses the strategic opportunity. The real shift is structural. CRM is no longer just a revenue-generating function. It is the system through which trust is built, reinforced, or eroded at scale.

In practical terms, this means a move away from unchecked personalisation toward governed personalisation. It means introducing “smart friction” where necessary, rather than removing it entirely. It means treating consistency in design, tone, and sender identity as a critical trust signal, not a creative preference. It also means recognising that loyalty programs, often seen purely as engagement tools, are increasingly becoming targets for fraud and must be managed with the same level of discipline.

In a market where brands are competing more aggressively than ever, and where scammers are exploiting the same pressures, the ability to build and maintain trust becomes a defining competitive advantage. The brands that succeed will not be those that push the hardest, but those that feel the most consistent, recognisable, and safe across every interaction.

We have spent the last decade making CRM more persuasive. The next phase will be defined by those who make it more trustworthy.