Background
In ancient times, only people coming from high social fibre could afford luxurious goods and services. They composed the educated, rich merchants and prominent people at the zenith of the living pyramid. Nevertheless, as market civilization continued to dawn, new consumer behaviours came into effect with a promise to change the existing ethical consumption into conspicuous consumption, and then status consumption.
For example, the elongation of a sumptuous product market and the modification of consumer behaviour have played an imperative role in comprehensive economics. A vast number of consumption literature materials suggest that, personal materialism levels dictate an individual’s consumption style and behaviour.
Depending on one’s social class and materialism nature, status consumption can affect one’s consumer behaviours. It is the potentiality of consumers to acquire luxurious goods and services, no matter the social class or an individual’s intent revenue. (Eastman, Goldsmith & Flynn, 1999, pp. 41-52).
It is paramount to note that, in most cases, the predisposition to purchase these goods is contextual. This is because; consumption varies from one person to another.
In essence, the main rationale why people have varied consumption decisions is that, most of them tend to lean towards an appallingly superficial motive of masquerading themselves with mottled excuses, namely expediency, parsimony, value, personal satisfaction and convenience. For example, if consumers accept superiority complex on their side, then the frail delusion of personal autonomy, which give purchasing command will be under threat. (Rick, 2006, pp. 97-112).
Introduction
The bottom line of today’s consumer detonation exhibits in the recognition that; personal consumer preferences make people feel liberated. However, consumers must take care not to allow their preferences be hemmed in by status apprehensions. This is because, by doing so, there is a possibility of disfiguring out the rational mind.
The rational mind is the one that helps people to make choices on what to purchase in order to realise the intended identity. On the other hand, with the emergence of information technology and liberal markets, developing countries are becoming prosperous.
Consequently, this ignites and enhances the demand for deluxe goods noticeably, consumed commodities. The budding markets for opulence commodities, annexation of lavish good market and the alteration of buyer actions, have surely changed the manner in which people purchase goods. (Richins, 1994, pp. 504-521).
Unlike ancient consumers, present consumers tend to purchase goods, which exhibit their social class. Interestingly, during the ancient times, people viewed those purchasing luxurious goods as extravagant. To them, this was just an appalling consumer behaviour, which did not go hand-in-hand with social fabrics.
However, people’s perceptions changed with time. Notably, changing personal perceptions have a serious impact to social values. If social values change, consequently consumption values will change proportionately. Research shows that, the purchase of lavish commodities instigates customers (consumers) and forms good investment within global economics. (Chaudhuri & Majumdar, 2006, pp. 1-5).
Materialism
In the contemporary world, most writers use the word “materialism” to imply material possession. It is true, people own vast commodities. However, in an ancient society, materialism was a philosophical impression, which implied, only two things existed. That is, matter and its locomotion.
Materialism in the present context advocates individual gladness and social evolution through material possessions. To some extent, academics agree that, materialism compose of allied characters, stances and principles centred on chattels and selection principles. Thus, the concept of materialism dictates different desires especially on what to purchase. (Fitzmaurice & Comegys, 2006, pp.287-295).
The concept of materialism divides into three fundamental scales, which include contentment, centrality, and triumph. It is easy to market new luxurious brands under status consumption than marketing a cheap commodity, which is familiar to consumers across the three social classes.
This is because; luxurious commodities associate with contentment, success and centrality. Talking of happiness, almost every individual believes that, possessions make life comfortable. On the other hand, centrality is the position that possessions take in an individual. Some want possessions to be part of their life so that they reach them easily, while others do not care. Success measures people’s judgement whether they enjoy personal or other people’s possessions. (Roberts, Manolis & Tanner, 2003, pp. 300-311).
Luxurious Commodities and Status Consumption
The current society gives credit and respect to consumer who buy luxurious products. In this way, these consumers display their social status and success to ethical consumers. Static consumption implies that, a certain group of consumers prefer taste and quality, rather than mere satisfaction.
To them, taste and demand are vital to their social conspicuousness. Societies classify into lower, middle and upper class due to the purchasing power of its members. In other words, there are people who go for normal purchase of non-luxurious goods (ethical consumers), while others purchase goods that, lower class society members remark as luxurious. Some people will reprimand this class while others will scorn at their superiority feelings. (O’Cass & McEwen, 2004, pp. 25-39).
On the other hand, there are consumers who like purchasing commodities just for prestige. Under this scenario, the advantage lies to the marketer who would love to introduce new luxurious commodities and products in the market. However, some economists tend to differ greatly on the aspect of conspicuous and status consumption. (Vigneron & Johnson, pp. 1-15).
Modern Status Consumption
Status consumption does not happen just like that. There are many reasons and theories behind modern status consumption. Luckily, these theories explain why consumers opt for status consumption rather than ethical consumption. Modern theorists have diverse views regarding the whole idea of status consumption.
A section of these theorists believes that, consumers opt for status consumption because they believe in their own satisfaction. On the other hand, there are theorists who suggest that, some consumers go for status purchase just because other people do status purchasing. (Basmann, Molina, & Slottje, 1988, pp. 531-537).
Not once, consumers purchase certain goods because someone else purchased it the previous day- bandwagon effect. A group of consumers who appear very interesting when it comes to status consumption are those who avoid buying certain commodities (apparent individualism) because, they are popular.
In marketing, this is snob effect. However, snob effect has its own disadvantages in that, consumers of this type opt for conspicuous consumption. It is not strange to witness the rich and educated people go for conspicuous consumption to maintain the status quo. Our markets go with social class. For example, the price of a lipstick in an ordinary supermarket is never the same as the one in a genteel supermarket where the rich shop. (Corneo & Jeanne, 1997, pp. 333-347).
With the emergence of new markets largely dominated by status consumption, new ideas have risen. These ideas are somehow new to the popular economics. For example, the idea of status consumption has created two measurable types of utility in the global markets. These include utilitarian and conspicuous ideas.
Consumption of products must always portray at least one of these ideas. Under utilitarian, consumers are the outright beneficiaries as they consume the whole product for the first time. On the other hand, conspicuous idea provides utility to the consumer largely because; this particular consumer always consumes the product or service. The two ideas are imperative to a marketer who would like to introduce a certain product within a social setting.
This is because, through conspicuous idea, the marketer knows the market for particular goods and services. Therefore, introducing a certain product or service would not be a problem. As for utilitarian, the marketer is already aware of the utility to sell to consumers.
Most of these consumers would want to purchase luxurious products and perhaps, new commodities coming into the market. Therefore, it is easier to introduce new utilities in a conspicuous environment rather than a utilitarian one. (Eastman, Goldsmith & Flynn, 1999, pp. 48-52).
There is no doubt today’s status consumption dominate modern markets. This particular market has attracted status consumption research in order to identify the type of products and services certain consumers prefer. Interestingly, status consumption varies not only by social class, but also, by gender. For example, modern women tend to go for luxurious dresses and cosmetics to create their own social class.
Thus, a marketer can decide to look for products that are appealing to women in order to reach their consumption. If this happens, even luxurious commodities and women garments will sell no matter how expensive they may seem.
There are also other luxurious commodities, which sell highly in the modern markets. For example, over the past decade, marketers have managed to sell millions of Patek Philippe wristwatch not because they are first-class, but because consumers feel heirloom when wearing them. (Richins, 1994, pp. 514-521).
Status Consumption and Women Cosmetics
There are two main factors, which show that, women cosmetics can achieve status consumption if well marketed. Firstly, if marketers go into the market and explain the intrinsic cosmetic quality and its importance to skin, women consumers would be more than willing to purchase the brand.
The second factor is that, these products receive less attention due to consumer ignorance. Thus, if marketers enter the emerging markets to sell anew brand of women cosmetics, consumers will be many no matter the price. The lack of literature on women cosmetics prompted two market researchers, Chao and Schor, to carry out research with an aim of determining status consumption in women cosmetics.
To their dismay, they found out, as the visibility of the cosmetic increased, the number of women consumers purchasing expensive cosmetic brands increased proportionally. The two researchers concluded by asserting that, where there is status consumption, the coefficients of cosmetic value dwindle monotonically when there is a decline in visibility. (Chao & Schor, 1998, 107- 126).
Status Theory
The current consumer theory is not a complicated one and many academics term it, universal. This theory is universal in the sense that, it allows marketers to combine various marketing models for to seduce consumers who will then purchase the products. However, the idea of purchasing a certain product is the sole responsibility of the customer. Research on consumer demands suggests that, predilection varies from one consumer to another.
This is the reason why, people purchase differently. In particular, the theory of consumption seems to be clear on this ideology. That is, a single consumer’s utility is the opposite of others. Ironically, utility depend on typical expenditure rather than minimum consumption. Veblen (1967) suggested that, when consumers start feeling superior, there is an inward glow of self-esteem and a sense of worth. Consequently, the two will lead to status consumption and eventually define the consumer’s social value and status (pp.29-31).
Marketers understand that, in markets where people but luxurious goods to show off their societal place or social class, two imperative attributes hold. The first precondition is that, at one point, consumers have to exhibit commonality and common preference towards certain commodities and services. If this happens, then one is sure of selling new brands.
The second precondition is that, consumer consumption ought to be collectively noticeable for demonstration purposes. Collective visibility is paramount when introducing a new brand because; it dispels the moral hazards, which might hinder purchases. Sometimes, when a new product comes into the market without intrinsic literature, some consumers may decide to embellish their consumption aiming social status. (Veblen, 1967, pp. 26-28).
To introduce a new brand, marketers should target social visibility in order to disengage classy consumers from discrediting new brands. Some people opt for expensive furniture and excellent living and dining rooms, while others just need a single clandestine room. Through this, marketers can identify the brand to introduce.
Marketers do understand that, if they introduce a new brand, say a mobile phone, and the wealthy go for it, then any other product from the same company will receive recognition among status consumers. In essence, utility must depend on the consumption of other consumers.
However, if this is not the case, and the manner in which consumers approach consumption remains the same, then the position of shared visibility of the brand introduced is extraneous to the prototype of buying. (Congleton, 1989, pp. 175-178).
Determinants of Status Consumption
When marketers want to introduce a new brand into emerging markets, they must first understand the determinants of status consumption. Experience and market survey on status consumption underline various hypothesis on factors that compel consumers to status purchase.
A number of literature materials on status consumption highlight learning, revenue, background, and urban settlement as factors behind status consumption. For example, educated people are more likely to engage in status consumption in order to display their social class. Thus, if a marketer wants to introduce luxurious commodities in a market, this can be the target group. (Bearden & Etzel, 1983, 183-188).
Marketers introducing luxurious products can target certain races for a market. For example, in United States, the history of consumption delinks Hispanics and black people from status consumption. This is because, majority of people coming from these two races are challenges socially and economically.
On the other hand, majority of white people in America engage in status buying simply because of their well-off social status and economic stability. These factors will help marketers to decide which status brand to introduce and the targeted group. (Kosicki, 1990, pp. 40-41).
Conclusion
Social status and economic stability are the two main reasons why consumers opt for status consumption. Social visibility determines the market for luxurious goods and services. If a marketer wants to introduce a new brand into the market, the first people who are likely to purchase the brand are either educated, rich or those in urban areas.
It is easier to find a market for luxurious commodities in urban areas than in rural areas because, most people in urban areas engage in status consumption. For example, it is easier to market women cosmetics in urban areas than in rural areas as women living in rural areas engage in status buying to gain social status. Status consumption depends on the social class, the revenue generated and the type of settlement.
Reference List
Basmann, R., Molina, D. & Slottje, D. (1988). A note on measuring Veblen’s theory of conspicuous consumption. Review of Economics and Statistics, 70(3), 531-535
Bearden, O. & Etzel, J. (1982). Reference group influence and product and brand purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 183-194.
Chao, A. & Schor, J. (1998). Empirical tests of status consumption: Evidence from women’s cosmetics. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 107-131.
Chaudhuri, H. & Majumdar S. (2006). Of Diamonds and Desires: Understanding Conspicuous Consumption from a Contemporary Marketing Perspective. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 11(1), 1-5.
Congleton, R. (1989). Efficient status seeking: Externalities, and the evolution of status games. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 11 (1), 175-190.
Eastman, K., Goldsmith, R. & Flynn, L. (1999). Status consumption in consumer behaviour: scale development and validation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(3), 41-52.
Fitzmaurice, J. & Comegys, B. (2006). Materialism and social consumption. Journal Of Marketing Theory and Practice, 287-300.
Kosicki, G. (1990). Income redistribution and aggregate consumption: Implications for the relative income model. American Economist, 34, 40-41.
Richins, L. (1994). Valuing things: the public and private meanings of possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 504-521.
O’Cass A. & McEwen, H. (2004). Exploring consumer status and conspicuous consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(1), 25-39.
Rick, R. (2006). Colin Campbell on Thorstein Veblen on Conspicuous Consumption. Journal of Economic Issues, 40 (1), 97-112.
Roberts, A., Manolis, C. & Tanner, J. (2003). Family structure, materialism, and compulsive buying: a reinquiry and extension. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 300-311.
Corneo, G. & Jeanne, O. (1997). Snobs, bandwagons, and the origin of social customs in consumer behaviour. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 32, 333-347.
Veblen, T. (1967). The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Penguin Books.
Vigneron, F. & Johnson, W. (1999). A Review and a Conceptual Framework of Prestige-Seeking Consumer Behaviour. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1-15.