6 Investigating How Product Developers Can Influence Consumers Towards
6.1 Specifying the Focus of the Quantitative Analysis
Qualitative studies have a much wider focus than most quantitative studies – especially in the case of explorative, theory-constructing research like the Grounded Theory study presented in the previous chapter. Quantitative studies, on the contrary, are usually delimited to a specific, measurable phenomenon that is investigated in more depth. Hence, this implies that not all 18 propositions resulting from the qualitative research phase can be subjected to additional quantitative research efforts as part of the current dissertation.
Instead, the focus of the quantitative analysis has to be limited considerably to yield meaningful findings and implications for theory and practice.
For cutting out a relevant piece of the findings for further analysis, the purpose of the quantitative research phase is revisited: recommendations for the practice of developing more sustainable products are to be derived. The qualitative analysis yielded two major areas of challenges product developers face. First, they encounter technical and organizational challenges within the development process, i.e. sustainability improvements might provoke trade-offs, sustainability is hard to assess from a life-cycle perspective, and the consideration of sustainability is only seldom codified properly. Second, they also stumble upon roadblocks on the market side – especially ambivalent consumer behavior and the problem of selling sustainability initiatives in a credible way are deemed challenging.
While meaningful conceptual research could tackle the first cluster of challenges, the problems product developers encounter on the market side (i.e. they have only limited insight into how their consumers think about sustainability) warrant subsequent quantitative studies. Extant research also supports this notion. Dangelico & Pujari (2010, p. 483) as well as Driessen et al. (2013, p. 324) find that severe challenges for successfully developing more sustainable products have to be attributed to the market phase. Esty & Simmons (2011, p. 272) report about a study surveying companies’ sustainability strategies. Even though most respondents declared sustainability to be a way of generating new sources of revenue, only a minority indicated to have a prime knowledge of their customers’ attitude towards sustainability. Also beyond sustainability, product developers and designers often
Specifying the Focus of the Quantitative Analysis 117
declare to be lacking helpful information about their customers’ needs (Creusen 2011, p. 406). However, to successfully bring more sustainable products to market, companies have to know what and how their potential customers think about sustainability and how that attitude translates into purchasing behavior (Esty & Simmons 2011, p. 274). Thus, research is called to help establish a better understanding of consumers’ take on product sustainability (Sheth et al. 2011, p. 34 f.; Luchs & Kumar 2015, p. 17).
To support product developers with their efforts of developing products that are equally more sustainable and successful in the marketplace, a shift of perspective is undertaken for the quantitative analysis. Thus, more sustainable products are not viewed through the eyes of product developers anymore but through the eyes of potential consumers. Observing how consumers react to different measures product development has for improving product sustainability poses an opportunity for providing meaningful recommendations for practice (de Medeiros et al. 2014, p. 83). Such a market-oriented approach also answers the calls for a more cross-functional perception of product development (Krishnan & Ulrich 2001, p. 12 f.) and sustainability issues (Esty & Simmons 2011, p. 192).
6.1.1 Deriving Hypotheses for Theory Validation
The challenges product developers face on the market side are summed up by Proposition 17 put forward in Section 5.9.2: they do not know how to support sustainability-based purchasing decisions through product development activities. However, as has been observed throughout the qualitative study, they still try to bring more sustainable products to the market. For this purpose, product developers from the sample primarily focus their attention on improving sustainability through exchanging material inputs (Proposition 9).
Especially traditional fossil fuel-based plastics are often replaced by recycled plastics from post-consumer or industrial waste. Other participants more open to experimentation reported about their efforts to include renewable resources (e.g. in the form of bio-based plastics) in their products. Regardless which kind of more sustainable material is chosen, these products’ sustainability features are often communicated through their exterior design (Propositions 5 and 6): earthy colors are especially common with companies that create a new line of more sustainable products separate from the rest of their product portfolio. Also beyond the limited sample of the current analysis, improving product sustainability through more sustainable materials and then communicating these improvements through a stereotyped “green” exterior design is common. The German consumer goods market holds numerous examples of such products from screw anchors (Greenline by fischer) to adhesive tapes (Eco & Clear by tesa), children’s books (100% Naturbuch by Beltz &
Gelberg), vacuum cleaners (AUFGREEN by AEG), or dishes (Bamboo Fiber by Kesper).
All stem from long-standing, established brands that eventually added a line of more
sustainable products to their traditional product portfolio. They are made (at least in part) from recycled or renewable resources and sometimes also hold other sustainability-related features like lower energy consumption or the abstinence of solvents. Also, the exterior of these products has been designed following “green” product stereotypes like muted earthy colors or natural fibers. Often, also the packaging follows the lead and is made from flat cardboard or similar natural-looking materials.
Companies that employ such a strategy are doing so for a good reason: they try to address conscious consumers (Nielsen 2015, p. 8 f.) through their products’ form (i.e. color, haptics, and shape). In fact, it is established by research that a product’s form can be used to draw attention in a retail environment (Creusen 2015, p. 304). Also, it can influence consumers’
perception of a product’s functional performance (Krishna & Morrin 2008, p. 816 f.).
Especially the color of a product can have decisive influence of consumers’ impression of product quality, ease of use, and their aesthetic evaluation (Creusen 2015, p. 308). This influence dominates even after more objective information about the product’s features becomes available (Hoegg & Alba 2011, p. 356 f.). Finally, the form of a product can provide consumers with symbolic value as it might help to express their personality (Creusen &
Schoormans 2005, p. 66).
While there are several examples of failed efforts to promote products through “green”
stereotypes – e.g. Nike’s “Considered” product line (Rice 2013) – recent research suggests that companies might actually have some options open to successfully implementing a differentiated design approach in the context of sustainability (Luchs & Kumar 2015, p. 17).
However, consumers’ interactions with product design in the context of sustainability is still a largely neglected area of research (Luchs & Swan 2011, p. 328). It is therefore called on research to support companies wanting to successfully bring more sustainable products to market (Luchs et al. 2012, p. 915). Thus, the subsequent quantitative analyses look into the effects of employing more sustainable materials and communicating this through a “green”
exterior design on consumers’ impressions of product quality and product sustainability, on their purchase intention as well as their willingness to pay, and on their aesthetic evaluation.
Post-consumer recycled plastics and bio-based plastics will be used as more sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel-based plastics. Fifteen hypotheses are put forward; they are displayed in Table 10.
.
Specifying the Focus of the Quantitative Analysis 119
Table 10: Hypotheses for Quantitative Analyses Issue Hypotheses
Product Quality
H1a Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product quality through a stereotyped “green” exterior design.
H1b Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product quality through choosing recycled materials.
H1c Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product quality through choosing bio-based materials.
Product Sustainability
H2a Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product sustainability through a stereotyped “green” exterior design.
H2b Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product sustainability through choosing recycled materials.
H2c Product developers can influence consumers’ perception of product sustainability through choosing bio-based materials.
Purchase Intention
H3a Product developers can influence consumers’ purchase intention through a stereotyped
“green” exterior design.
H3b Product developers can influence consumers’ purchase intention through choosing recycled materials.
H3c Product developers can influence consumers’ purchase intention through choosing bio-based materials.
Willingness to Pay
H4a Product developers can influence consumers’ willingness to pay through a stereotyped
“green” exterior design.
H4b Product developers can influence consumers’ willingness to pay through choosing recycled materials.
H4c Product developers can influence consumers’ willingness to pay through choosing bio-based materials.
Aesthetics H5a Product developers can influence consumers’ aesthetic evaluation through a stereotyped
“green” exterior design.
H5b Product developers can influence consumers’ aesthetic evaluation through choosing recycled materials.
H5c Product developers can influence consumers’ aesthetic evaluation through choosing bio-based materials.
The fifteen hypotheses put forward are subjected to quantitative inquiry throughout the next sections. However, it is important to note that, in fact, the corresponding null hypotheses will be tested empirically (stating the opposites of the so-called alternative hypotheses displayed in Table 10). If the analysis allows for rejecting a null hypothesis, this provides support for the corresponding alternative hypothesis (Field 2009, p. 27; Blumberg et al.
2011, p. 546 f.). Also, each hypothesis will be tested separately for different exemplary products. However, no interaction effects between the different products will be considered.
6.1.2 Selecting Exemplary Products
As was established in Section 2.3.2, consumer goods can be distinguished into several product categories that comprise products sharing some distinct features. Throughout the qualitative study, it became apparent that the nature of product sustainability and also the kind of extant opportunities for sustainability improvements much depend on these product
specifics. For example, a refrigerator’s sustainability level is to a large degree determined by the way consumers use it. Therefore, product developers can bring high leverage to bear on sustainability through improving the energy efficiency or the life expectancy of a refrigerator. The sustainability level of baking paper, on the other hand, is rather depending on the process technology used for manufacturing and the way it is disposed of after its one-time use. Thus, product developers should focus their attention on the manufacturing phase and recyclability if they want to foster product sustainability.
Also from a consumers’ perspective, the perception and appreciation of improved sustainability depend on the product category (Luchs et al. 2010, p. 28). For the purpose of deriving recommendations for practice, neither ignoring such differences nor focusing on one specific product would be a constructive approach for the current dissertation.
Therefore, exemplary products were selected as representatives of different groups of consumer goods. Requirements were set up that had to be fulfilled by the product sample:
(1) all products should contain parts made from plastics to be able to compare material issues, (2) durable and non-durable goods should be included, (3) the products should cover a wide variety of consumer goods categories, and (4) all products should be widely-used and easy to understand. For selecting suitable products, a workshop with five doctoral students from TUHH’s26 Institute of Business Logistics and General Management was held.
The final product sample consists of six products: headphones, stapler, picnic dishes, garbage bags, hair blower, and toothbrush (see Figure 34).
Figure 34: Pictures of the Exemplary Products
26 TUHH = Hamburg University of Technology.
P1 Headphones P2 Stapler P3 Picnic Dishes
P4 Garbage Bags P5 Hair Blower P6 Toothbrush
Specifying the Focus of the Quantitative Analysis 121
For each of the six products, representative pictures were acquired through a stock photo agency.27 Care was taken to avoid any product pictures that contain brand names or remind the viewer of a specific brand. Again, a workshop was held to select the most suitable picture for each product. Figure 34 displays the final selection. It is used to illustrate the products throughout the preliminary studies and the main experiment.
6.1.3 Designing the Manipulations
Two aspects will be manipulated throughout the following studies: the material the products are made of as well as their exterior design. The material information manipulation will be implemented through a written note as this is the only practical way to disclose any explicit information about a product’s material in an online survey. Thus, the product pictures presented in Figure 34 will be supplemented by a reference to the product’s main material.
Three treatments are defined: “Made from fossil fuel-based plastics”, “Made from post-consumer recycled plastics”, and “Made from bio-based plastics”. Granted, it heavily depends on the specific material, on its processing, and on the weighting of different environmental and social impacts how sustainable both material alternatives to fossil fuel-based plastics are (Hallstedt 2008, p. 13 f.). However, both alternatives are known to consumers, generally understood to be more sustainable, and also are made use of for actual more sustainable products.
The exterior design manipulation is implemented through producing stereotyped “green”
versions of the six exemplary products. Using the raster graphics editor Adobe Photoshop, a professional picture editor recolored the products in earthy tones and applied textures that can be found on actual products made from bioplastics. Care was taken to ensure the products look realistic. For this purpose, different versions of the edited photos were evaluated by a group of graduate and doctoral students. The final versions of the edited photos are displayed in Figure 35.
27 See Appendix II for sources of the product pictures.
Figure 35: Edited “Green” Versions of the Exemplary Products