Implications of the Quantitative Analysis

After presenting the findings of the quantitative study, their implications are put forward in the following sections. Just like for the qualitative research phase, they are differentiated into theoretical and managerial implications even though it is acknowledged that they emerge to be highly intertwined.

Implications of the Quantitative Analysis 155

6.6.1 Theoretical Implications

The findings of the quantitative research phase hold some important implications for theory and research. First, the current analysis emphasizes the importance of product design as a field of inquiry, as the exterior of a product shapes consumers’ perceptions about all product properties. Certain features like the exterior design, as well as information about the material, can induce a halo effect that influences the perceptions of the product on a larger scale. Specifically, it was demonstrated that manipulating the exterior of a product can have both obvious (e.g. “greening” of a product might improve sustainability evaluation) and rather surprising findings (e.g. “greening” of a product might improve quality evaluation).

Also, the findings are distinctive for different product types. In general, some product properties are easy to grasp and compare for consumers after experiencing the first impression of product design, and they start to engage with the product – e.g. the quality level of garbage bags can be observed once they are filled, and the functional performance of headphones can be observed when consumers use them and listen to music.

Sustainability, however, only seldom becomes truly visible to consumers, as it emerges to be more abstract and fuzzy. The way garbage bags or headphones are produced or disposed and the associated social and environmental consequences cannot be experienced through using them. Thus, consumers’ sustainability evaluations are entirely based on their (first) impression about the product and information provided by the consumer goods companies through claims or labels. Until today, empirical studies on the effects of different product designs are rare. The current analysis exclusively focused on manipulating the product color and texture, which already produced a cornucopia of sometimes contradictory findings. However, product design is also determined by other factors like the shape and size as well as haptics – a factor that cannot be manipulated in an online survey and warrants laboratory experiments. The current trends with respect to more affordable and readily available additive manufacturing technologies could be a decisive facilitator for more laboratory studies in the field of product design. Thus, research should further focus its attention on the role product design can play in influencing consumer behavior – especially in the context of more sustainable products.

As a second implication, research should focus on consumers’ perceptions of different materials. The current analysis has demonstrated that consumers seem to have a highly positive opinion of more sustainable materials like post-consumer recycled plastics and bioplastics. They typically evaluated these materials more favorably than the other treatments for all product aspects included in the study – e.g. switching to bioplastics makes garbage bags look more attractive and picnic dishes appear to be of higher quality.

However, previously the qualitative study has revealed that product developers often refrain

from using these materials. Besides technical challenges, one important reason for this is the ambiguity of consumer responses to more sustainable materials – at least, product developers expect consumers to behave this way. Specifically, they expect consumers to doubt the durability of bio-based materials or to demand lower prices for products made from recycled materials, as these might be understood as made of waste. The quantitative follow-up study questions these preconceived notions and suggests consumers have much more nuanced perceptions. Therefore, product developers should consider pairing their efforts to move towards more sustainable material choices with effective signaling of these enhanced properties (such as materials labels). Granted, in the current study, consumers did not react to experiencing the true look and feel of more sustainable materials, but to claims made during an online survey. Also, the small amount of extant research on this topic does not go beyond this more theoretical stage. Thus, more in-depth research on consumer responses in a laboratory environment is warranted to comprehensively grasp consumers’ expectations, apprehensions, and reactions as well as to support the widespread adoption of more sustainable materials in the industry.

The third implication is a need for more multidisciplinary research in the field of sustainable product development – both in the sense of jointly examining multiple departments and working in multidisciplinary research teams. As the qualitative study has illustrated, the activities of product development and marketing are highly intertwined with respect to bringing a new concept to a state of market readiness. While product developers are certainly more concerned with the technical aspects of this process, their cognition does not end at organizational borders. Thus, product developers appeared to be highly concerned with market reactions to their products and their ways of influencing them. While silo mentality seems to be at least partly overcome in such industry environments, it still dominates research on sustainable product development (see Chapter 3). Most studies focus on highly specific issues, and only some authors aspire to get the bigger picture of developing more sustainable products within the dynamics of a company or an entire supply network. However, as the current analysis has illustrated, it can yield meaningful findings if the scope of the study is extended beyond the area of responsibility of a single department:

the current quantitative analysis took a product developer’s perspective to address a problem from marketing through more or less building on established market research techniques. It also seems promising to spotlight problems encountered in product development from the marketing, production, or even supply chain perspective. Also, as the process of sustainable product development requires multiple departments, it appears valuable to conduct more research in this area in multidisciplinary research teams. Thus, researchers from diverse domains like social sciences, engineering, industrial design, and

Implications of the Quantitative Analysis 157

life sciences should join forces to advance the field further. Summing up, the findings of the quantitative research phase lead to the following implications for theory and research:

 [T4] Focus on consumers’ perception of product design: Product design has a decisive influence on consumers’ first impression of a product. While the perception of most product properties like quality or functionality can be corrected when consumers engage with the product, sustainability most often cannot. Thus, more research – also including other aspects of product design – is warranted.

 [T5] Focus on consumers’ perception of more sustainable materials: In the current study, consumers exposed a positive opinion about more sustainable materials. Further, the signals introduced with more sustainable materials can induce halo effects that influence consumer perceptions far beyond the first impression.

Product developers should leverage these subtle ways of influencing consumer reaction. In contrast, product developers from the qualitative study named unpredictable consumer behavior as a major roadblock for the adoption of bio-based materials in particular. Thus, laboratory research on consumers’ reactions to actual products is needed to support a widespread use of more sustainable materials.

 [T6] Intensify multidisciplinary research on sustainability issues: Most extant research on sustainable product development focuses on domain-specific issues without addressing the bigger picture. However, multidisciplinary research – both regarding multiple departments and multiple academic disciplines – would help to establish a better understanding of the true needs of and obstacles to the practice of more sustainable product development.

6.6.2 Managerial Implications

The findings of the current quantitative analysis also hold important implications for management. The underlying question of the current analysis was concerned with the benefits of communicating sustainability improvements through a stereotyped “green”

exterior design. Thus, the question emerges: is it beneficial for companies to follow this path? The answer to this question is not as straightforward as would be expected since the benefits much depend on the product type. Even though there are a several findings consistent for all products under study (as displayed in Section 6.5.5), most findings are individual to the product in question. For example, it has been demonstrated that signaling superior sustainability through a “green” design or more sustainable materials works for all four products. However, making consumers believe in superior product sustainability is only part of the equation since it does not seem to automatically translate into an actual purchasing intention. In fact, the current analysis has demonstrated that it seldom does.

“Green” headphones, for example, will not be bought by many consumers since most of them tie sustainability to lower quality and also dislike the “green” design. Related research suggests that consumers believe that there is an inherent trade-off between product sustainability and performance. This trade-off can in part be overcome by a superior aesthetic product design (Luchs et al. 2012, pp. 913–915). Granted, the evaluation of aesthetics is a highly subjective task. However, as the main experiment has revealed, the

“green” product design in nearly all cases received lower ratings than the original design.

Thus, an overt “green” design is probably not appropriate for products that consumers care about (i.e. they are looking for high performance and quality).

It further has to be kept in mind that all findings were generated in a constructed and controlled research setup, and are not the result of observing consumer choices in a retail environment. While it is established that the first visual impression shapes consumers’

attitudes towards products, in reality, numerous other factors also determine if a consumer would leave the store with a standard or a “green” product in hand. For example, the product’s packaging as well as its presentation at the point of sale can also be decisive.

Some of the “green” products from the German consumer goods market introduced in Section 6.1.1 are sitting on the shelves just like any other product while others are advertised through custom-made point of sale displays or on end caps. However, despite the constricted experimental setup, some surprising observations can lead to insightful conclusions. For example, consumers’ aesthetic evaluations were significantly affected by the material information, while, in fact, the product’s exterior design in the picture was held constant. In reality, in the light of the high number of possible influences on consumers’

product perceptions, there might be numerous other side-effects that product developers do not consider while deciding on a “green” product design. Even though it might seem tempting to trigger consumers’ social and environmental consciousness through design stereotypes, companies should not make it too easy on themselves.

Apart from this, companies should be careful about launching a more sustainable product as a test balloon for another reason: the qualitative analysis has revealed that the consequences of a market failure often go far beyond the immediate financial losses. A

“crashed” test balloon can act as a severe and long-lasting internal roadblock to hamper further activities regarding more sustainable products. Once a company experiences the unavoidable “crash landing” with a rather halfhearted test balloon, it is likely to abandon any product sustainability initiatives for the time to come, as pundits will feel vindicated: “We tested it, and the consumers did not like it.” Summing up, the findings of the quantitative data analysis lead to the following managerial implications:

 [M5] Develop a consistent design strategy: The analysis has demonstrated that a

“green” design indeed signals superior sustainability. However, companies should choose their design strategy wisely, as a “green” design often has a negative impact on the purchase intention of consumers. Thus, simply trying to establish a more sustainable product line by coloring it green does not work. Sustainability stereotypes may lower consumers’ confidence about sufficient quality and functionality for some product categories. A consistent strategy that considers the halo effect of “green”

design and material choices seems to be the most promising way to avoid sending mixed signals.

Implications of the Quantitative Analysis 159

 [M6] Consider undesired side effects: Consumers’ purchase decisions are affected by a high number of influencing factors. Developers should be aware that their design choices in the context of more sustainable products also might have undesired side effects, due to unusual interdependencies with product aspects that do not comply with the rational thinking of engineers.

In analogy to the presentation of the qualitative study’s findings, this study’s managerial implications are matched to the relevant departments and phases of the product development process in Figure 51. As became clear during the entire study, both developing a consistent design strategy and considering undesired side effects are issues product development and marketing should jointly discuss during system-level design and detail design. Even though both tasks should ultimately be the responsibility of product development, developers would be well advised to systematically include marketing’s knowledge of consumer behavior and expectations also during these later phases of the development process.

Figure 51: Matching of Managerial Implications, Departments, and Development Process Phases

Product Development Process

Planning Planning

Concept Development

System-Level Design

Detail Design

Testing &

Refinement

Production Ramp-Up

Product Development Marketing Corporate Strategy Implication M1: Establish Credible Corporate Sustainability Approach

Implication M2: Collaborate with Supply Chain Partners Implication M4: Allow for Experiments

Implication M3:

Set Clear Goals

Implication M5:

Develop a Consistent Design Strategy

Implication M6:

Consider Undesired Side Effects