Open Finance promises to make financial services more personalised, accessible and inclusive. Better use of financial data could help people manage their money, access suitable products and support, and build greater financial resilience. However, realising that potential will depend on whether people can see real value in sharing their data, have confidence in how it will be used and remain fully in control of it.
Mental health problems can affect our ability to manage money, including our concentration, memory and ability to process complex information or make decisions. At the same time, financial difficulty can worsen our mental health, creating a cycle that can be difficult to break.
At the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute, we put lived experience at the heart of our work through our Research Community of around 5,000 people with experience of mental health problems or caring for someone who does.
Our new research found that people often valued Open Banking-enabled services which made their finances easier to see, reduced paperwork and cut down on repetitive tasks.
But the benefits were uneven. The same financial information that helped one person feel more in control could make another feel anxious or overwhelmed. And people’s ability to engage with financial services can change significantly during periods of poor mental health.
Kate Wells, research officer, Money and Mental Health Policy Institute
As the industry looks towards the next phase of financial data sharing, we should be asking an important question: what will it take for greater access to data to translate into genuinely better, more inclusive outcomes?
Participation doesn’t necessarily mean comfort
One of the clearest lessons from our research is that usage alone tells us relatively little about how comfortable people feel sharing their financial data.
Many participants we surveyed were already using Open Banking-enabled services, but nearly seven in 10 (68%) told us they would feel uncomfortable sharing additional financial information through future Open Finance services.
That distinction matters when adoption is regularly treated as evidence of growing consumer confidence. It risks missing the more nuanced, behavioural balancing many consumers are doing when deciding whether they feel comfortable sharing their data.
Inclusion starts with consumer outcomes
As Open Finance develops, there will be no shortage of technically possible use cases. The more important question is which of them create enough value for consumers to justify the data they are being asked to share.
That is why one of our recommendations is that future Open Finance use cases should meet a clear consumer outcomes test before implementation. This means considering whether a use case solves a genuine consumer need, what outcomes it will deliver for people in vulnerable circumstances and whether the data being requested is proportionate to the benefit.
There is a commercial opportunity here too. Open Finance propositions that solve recognisable problems and make their value clear to consumers are more likely to build confidence and sustained engagement.
We see trust as an outcome not a starting point.
Encouraging adoption isn’t about saying something is ‘trusted’ or bombarding consumers with meaningless certification marks. Trust develops when people see the clear value in sharing, understand what is happening with their information and retain meaningful control over their data. One of the biggest pathways to trust is to build confidence first – and that means being clear about what happens if something goes wrong.
Control without unnecessary friction
Our research found a strong desire for meaningful control. Three quarters (76%) of respondents to a survey of our Research Community wanted to see exactly what information was being shared, while 68% wanted a simple way to stop sharing.
As financial data sharing becomes more complex, good design will need to balance simplicity with meaningful opportunities to understand and review important decisions.
How do you design the right amount of control? When does it become burdensome instead of genuinely helpful? Too much friction can make useful services harder to access, but too little can remove moments that help consumers understand what they are agreeing to. The challenge is proportionate friction: designing journeys that are simple when they can be, while providing additional support or opportunities to pause where decisions could have significant consequences.
This also matters for financial inclusion. Systems need to work for people in real-world circumstances, including when confidence, concentration or capacity to deal with complex decisions fluctuates.
Getting the next phase right
Open Banking has given us an opportunity to learn how consumers experience financial data sharing before Open Finance reaches much further into people’s financial lives.
The potential is significant. But delivering more inclusive financial services will depend on the outcomes Open Finance creates for consumers, rather than just the volume of data it makes available. That means building services that work beyond the ‘ideal’ financially confident user, helping consumers build confidence and understanding the behavioural balance involved when people choose whether to share their financial data.
I’ll be exploring these questions at Open Banking Expo UK & Europe on 14 October as part of the panel ‘Unlocking growth through financial inclusion’, looking at how the industry can balance commercial growth with better customer outcomes as Open Finance develops.
Kate Wells is research officer at the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute
Visit the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute team at Stand G14 on the Exhibition Floor
