Led implementation of Google Consent Mode V2 across Honda's European analytics infrastructure, driven by GDPR and ePrivacy obligations, working with Legal and Privacy through a stringent compliance testing process.
→ Consent Mode V2 implemented across European analytics infrastructure ahead of the regulatory deadline.
Problem
Google's Consent Mode V2 requirement, driven by GDPR and ePrivacy obligations across the EEA, needed to be implemented across Honda's European analytics infrastructure, touching every market's consent and tracking behaviour, not just a single site or tool.
Context
This sat within my ownership of the European digital platform's data and reporting capability, on a timeline set by the regulatory update rather than internal planning.
Business objective
Bring European analytics infrastructure into compliance with Consent Mode V2 requirements across all markets, verified through a stringent testing process before rollout.
Customer/user objective
Customers across every market needed their consent choices genuinely respected in how analytics data was collected, not just nominally compliant on paper.
Constraints
The change touched the whole European analytics infrastructure at once, since consent handling isn't something that can vary safely market by market, and the timeline was set by the regulatory requirement rather than something that could be extended.
Stakeholders
Legal and Privacy, who needed to sign off the compliance approach before rollout, and market teams across Europe whose analytics data continuity depended on the change being implemented correctly.
Research and discovery
I worked through what Consent Mode V2 actually required in practice against Honda's existing consent and tagging setup, to understand exactly where the current implementation fell short.
Options considered
I considered a phased market-by-market rollout versus implementing across the whole European infrastructure at once. Given consent handling needs to be consistent to be defensible, I chose the single coordinated rollout, backed by a stringent testing process rather than a staggered one.
Prioritisation
Getting the Legal and Privacy compliance position agreed came before implementation began, since building against an unconfirmed compliance interpretation risked rework.
Delivery
I worked with Legal and Privacy to confirm the compliance approach, then led implementation of Consent Mode V2 across the European analytics infrastructure, running a stringent testing process to verify consent signals were being respected correctly before rollout completed.
Decisions made
Testing rigorously before full rollout, rather than treating go-live as the final check, was the decision that mattered most, consent compliance issues are the kind of gap that isn't obvious until data is genuinely reviewed against what consent was actually given.
Trade-offs
The stringent testing process added time before rollout completed. I judged that necessary given the compliance and regulatory stakes involved.
Business outcome
European analytics infrastructure met Consent Mode V2 requirements ahead of the regulatory deadline, verified through rigorous testing rather than assumed compliance.
Customer outcome
Customers' consent choices are genuinely reflected in how their data is collected, tested and verified rather than taken on faith.
Lessons learned
Regulatory-driven analytics changes need the same rigour as any other compliance work, Legal and Privacy sign-off has to happen before implementation, not alongside it, or the risk of rework is real.
What I'd improve today
I would build a standing testing framework for consent-related changes so future regulatory updates could be verified faster, rather than building the testing process from scratch under deadline pressure again.
