Introduce Inferiority to Move Superiority

To step up your sales of the high-end option, add a choice that’s way down in comparative attractiveness. Such attractiveness is determined by a shopper’s consideration of each item’s desirability—such as the quality of a printer’s output—and feasibility—such as the price of the printer. In ESADE and Stanford University studies, adding a low-desirability low-feasibility alternative to a consideration set moved the consumer’s preferences away from the lower-desirability higher-feasibility option and toward the higher-desirability lower-feasibility option.
     This upscaling effect was seen when study participants were asked to choose between a 30L-capacity $29.99 backpack and a 40L-capacity $39.99 backpack. Participants also given a 30L-capacity $39.99 model to consider were more likely to end up selecting the 40L-capacity $39.99 backpack than were participants not given that third alternative. Parallel results were seen with other study participants asked to select among alternative Bluetooth speakers, hard drives, hotels, or televisions.
     The researchers’ explanation for the upscaling effect is that shoppers find it easier to justify their natural preference for a high-end option when a low-desirability low feasibility alternative—a decoy—is in the consideration set. Other experiments by the researchers showed how the upscaling effect is stronger when the high-end option is positioned physically close to the decoy—such as on the same webpage—and the effect fades away if the shopper is asked to explain their reasoning before choosing.
     There’s evidence from studies at Brigham Young University and Emory University that asking a shopper to set a budget before choosing among differently priced alternatives is another approach to moving the shopper toward selecting a superior-quality, higher-priced alternative. When a shopper sets a limit on what they’ll spend, they’ll screen out alternatives which exceed the budget. The shopper now relaxes their attention to price. This allows the shopper to place higher importance on comparative quality of the alternatives. If there had been many alternatives at the start, a second result of the shopper setting a spending limit is that the set size is reduced. This amplifies the relative quality differences among the remaining choices. The highest quality item will be perceived to be of even higher relative quality, facilitating a justification for purchasing it.
     Consumers prefer to purchase higher quality when all else is equal. Encouraging the shopper to set a purchase budget and then including a clearly inferior alternative in the choice set helps the shopper achieve that objective.

Successfully influence the most prosperous & most loyal consumer age group. For the specific strategies & tactics you need, click here.

Click for more…

Contract with Near-Term Use via Contractions 

Decoy the Indecisive Without Getting Decoyed 

Upgrade Your Upselling