A few days ago, I was having some allergy issues so I went to CVS to buy some medicine. When I reached the allergy aisle, I was shocked to see how many different types of allergy medicines there were. There were at least three different brand names (Benadryl, Claritin, Zyrtec, etc.), along with the generic brands. On top that, within each brand, there were at least a few different types of medications for people who wanted non-drowsy or nighttime medicines. I literally spent about 20 minutes trying to figure out which brand and type of medicine to buy. I finally settled on Claritin non-drowsy tablets.
I hurriedly came home and took one of the pills, which should have taken effect within 30 minutes. Needless to say, 6 hours later when I was getting ready to go to sleep, the medicine still wasn’t kicking in as well as I would have liked. I was so angry with myself! How was it possible that after spending so much time trying to select from such a variety of medicines that I picked the one that didn’t work!?
That’s Schwarz’s argument. It’s not that the Claritin didn’t necessarily work. It’s just that in my mind, I had set such high expectations for the Claritin that after it didn’t live up to my standards, I felt regret and anger for not choosing another brand. And that anger could only be towards myself because I was the one who decided which brand to buy.
I think Schwarz’s ideas are really enlightening when it comes to consumer decisions. I think his ideas have even bigger implications for marketers. Ask yourself this: how many brands can you think of that only offer one type or version of any product? I honestly can’t think of any. That means that marketers have to work incredibly hard to make their product stand out in consumers’ minds. In department or grocery stores, that’ll be almost impossible for them to do unless consumers already have preconceived notions before entering the store. If a consumer comes into a store similarly to how I did for my allergy medication, it’s really the luck of the draw for which brand he or she will end up picking. That means marketers have to work harder than ever to elevate their brand over the competition.
On the other hand, I do think there is a way for some marketers to take advantage of this paradox of choice idea, and it deals with marketing to consumers online. Like I mentioned in my Generation Y post, it all comes back to technology. If I, as a consumer, am guided through the many choices from which I could potentially choose, I think I would be less frustrated with the choice I end up picking. Usually this guidance doesn’t happen when you physically go to a store because half the time you can’t find any store clerks, but online it is possible. For example, in the picture below (click to enlarge) you can see that when you go to a popular retail website such as OldNavy.com, you have the option to narrow down what’s available by providing the specific sizes you are looking for. Additionally, you can also narrow down the type of clothing you’re interested in, such as pants, tees, skirts, etc., which will make it easier for you to find what you are looking for.
I want to clear something up here. I’m not saying the paradox of choice is a positive thing for consumers if a company has a website. I’m saying that if a brand’s marketers are able to help narrow down consumers’ choices, consumers will be happier with that specific brand because they will have been provided help to shrink down what initially seemed to be an endless list of possibilities. After shopping online, these consumers will be more likely to go to retail locations and purchase products from the company since they were previously satisfied with their online purchases.
No comments:
Post a Comment