O paradoxo da escolha, again

Quantas vezes, numa sala de reuniões de uma empresa, ouvi o argumento:
- Temos de ter todas as opções, temos de ser uma one stop shop, não podemos correr o risco de deixar uma opção para ser fornecida pela concorrência.

Quantas vezes tento explicar o paradoxo da escolha... algumas sem sucesso. Demasiada escolha mata a escolha. Excesso de escolha mata a escolha. E mais isto.

Seth Godin e "Anything you want"

Acerca da diversidade de escolha

Dois artigos, lidos no mesmo dia e com conclusões opostas:

• "Variety, Not Quantity, Drives Car Sales"

"In their analysis, the authors found that an increase in a dealer’s inventory of a specific model actually lowered overall sales. But there’s a twist. If the boost in inventory also expanded the number of models available—in other words, if the dealership added a new type of Cadillac, not just more of the same model it already carried—then sales did increase.
.
Expanded variety—from engine sizes to the number of doors—enables dealers to appeal to a wider set of consumer preferences, the authors write. "

• "Increase Sales by NOT Giving Customers Choices"

"As contrary as it might seem, you are not doing your customer any favor by offering thousands of choices, or even dozens. The act of choosing is an imposition. Fundamentally, you are asking your customers to do your work for you. Yes, the customer will want something just right, and yes, every customer may want something different. But the choosing of it is still an onerous activity."

Será que ambas as abordagens fazem sentido, cada uma na sua categoria, em função da importância da compra na vida dos clientes?

Assim, têm todo o interesse em contrariar Mongo

Ao ler este texto de Matt Ridley "The myth that choice overload is a cause of great misery" começo a especular...
.
As empresas grandes, as empresas viciadas e habituadas ao volume, à escala, ao negócio do custo como o factor competitivo número 1, têm tudo a perder com o advento de Mongo.
.
Assim, têm todo o interesse em contrariar Mongo, em contrariar o Estranhistão, em defender que escolher cansa, em defender que é tudo igual, que se escolhe entre genéricos.

"In many instances, addition can subtract"

"take a more recent study. This one asked participants to imagine they wanted to learn German. Then the researchers divided people into two groups. One group had to choose between a $575 online German-language course and a $449 German-language software package. The other group had to choose between that same $575 online course and the $449 software package plus a German dictionary. Forty-nine percent of people in the first group picked the software package over the online course. But only 36 percent of the second group made that selection—despite its being a better deal. “Adding an inexpensive item to a product offering can lead to a decline in consumers’ willingness to pay,” the researchers concluded. In many instances, addition can subtract. This is why curation is so important, especially in a world saturated with options and alternatives. Framing people’s options in a way that restricts their choices can help them see those choices more clearly instead of overwhelming them. What Mies van der Rohe said of designing buildings is equally true of moving those who inhabit them: Less is more."

"To Sell Is Human: The Surprising Truth About Moving Others" de Daniel Pink

“Trop de choix tue le choix”

"Not adding value is the same as taking it away" de Seth Godin.
.
Quando uma empresa inunda o mercado com sucessivas ondas de produtos "me-too"...

"Cutting Down On Choice Is The Best Way To Make Better Decisions"

"Sheena Iyengar: How to make choosing easier" Uma comunicação muito interessante (vídeo) - sobretudo as 4 medidas concretas a partir do minuto 7.

"The tyranny of choice"

"The tyranny of choice"

Pensamento fossilizado

Já aqui comentei escritos de Barry Schwartz, por exemplo, acerca do paradoxo da escolha.
.
Agora encontrei este artigo "Economics Made Easy: Think Friction" com o qual não posso concordar, é tão... século XX, tão ultrapassado, tão "plano quinquenal".
.
Por exemplo este trecho:
.
"It may seem heartless to worship efficiency at any cost, including lost jobs and decimated communities, but it is important to understand that increased efficiency is the only way a society’s standard of living will improve. (Moi ici: Conversa da tríade encalhada. "the only way"?) If your company raises your pay without becoming more efficient, it will have to raise its prices in order to pay you. (Moi ici: Conversa da tríade encalhada. A esta argumentação chamo de "jogo do gato e do rato"? Os ex-ministros TdS e Vieira da Silva eram useiros e vezeiros nela. Agora que uma empresa em vez de apostar só na redução dos custos, só na redução da eficiência, aposta no aumento da eficácia, aposta na co-criação de mais valor potencial... um resultado completamente diferente, uma outra ordem de grandeza) This is true of all companies. And if all companies raise their prices to allow for higher wages, you will end up just running in place, with your higher wages exactly matched by the higher prices of the things you buy. It is only if your company and others find a way to pay you more without charging more that your living standard goes up. (Moi ici: Pagar mais pelo mesmo é treta de governo com o monopólio da força, agora pagar mais por mais e de livre vontade... não, não é matéria do século XX)
.
So if we want to make material progress, we must become more efficient. (Moi ici: Sim, o calçado, o têxtil e o vestuário e o mobiliário português quando fugiram dessa guerra única - recordar esta série -... ilustram bem como a eficiência não é a única via) In addition, as markets have become ever more globalized, increased efficiency of American companies has become a condition for their very survival.
.
So firms compete to become more efficient, and we as consumers, along with Bain Capital and its like, benefit from this competition."
.
Esta conversa padece de um mal supremo!!!
.
Parte do princípio que o que se produz é sempre igual, que as saídas têm sempre os mesmos atributos. Um pensamento fossilizado...
.
Ainda esta semana, no Porto, na rua Barros Lima, passei a pé por um parque de estacionamento. Lembrei-me de, miúdo, ir para a catequese na igreja do Bonfim e passar por aquele sítio e assistir à abertura do parque.
.
O parque pareceu-me em bom estado e muito parecido com o que era nesse tempo. Como é que o proprietário do parque pode aumentar o seu rendimento? Pode aumentar o espaço? Admitamos que não, até podia com sistemas verticais. Pode aumentar o preço? Pode mas estará limitado pela concorrência pelo mesmo serviço, é tudo uma questão de localização. Pode ganhar mais? Pode, se alargar os atributos do que oferece além do estacionamento: (facultativo) lavagem, mudança de óleo, limpeza interior, transporte e tratamento da revisão periódica, mudança de pneus, ... sem impor, simplesmente facilitando a vida a alguns dos clientes que reconheçam valor nessas ofertas acrescidas.

O paradoxo da escolha

Em tempos escrevi um postal sobre os consultores de compra em vez de vendedores e também sobre Barry Schwartz.
.
A revista strategy+business publicou um interessante artigo "A Better Choosing Experience" de Sheena Iyengar e Kanika Agrawal.
.
"Today it seems obvious to offer consumers more choice — but the experience is no longer a novelty, or nearly as much fun. Whereas in 1949 the average grocery store stocked 3,700 products, the average supermarket today has 45,000 products, and the typical Walmart has 100,000 products.
...
Consumers have grown accustomed to having a lot of choice, and many people still express a strong desire for having more options. But that doesn’t make it a good idea. There are neurological limits on humans’ ability to process information, and the task of having to choose is often experienced as suffering, not pleasure.

That is why, rather than helping consumers better satisfy their preferences, the explosion of choice has made it more difficult overall for people to identify what they want and how to get it. Thus, if the market for your product is saturated with choice, you can’t gain a competitive edge by dumping more choices into the mix. Instead, you can outthink and outperform your competitors by turning the process of choosing into an experience that is more positive and less mind-numbing for your customers. You can design a more helpful form of choice.
.
The goal of a new approach to choice should not be to manipulate consumers into making choices that aren’t right for them, but rather to collaborate in a way that benefits both the consumer and the marketer.
...
you truly can help consumers help themselves. To accomplish this, here are four actions you can take:

1. Cut the number of options.
2. Create confidence with expert or personalized recommendations.
3. Categorize your offerings so that consumers better understand their options.
4. Condition consumers by gradually introducing them to more-complex choices.

Offered together, these actions can distinguish your company. Rather than trapping people in a morass of alternatives, you’ll be one of those rare companies whose offerings rise to the top by raising customer spirits.
...
Don’t marketers have to give consumers what they want? Yes and no. We should give them what they really want, not what they say they want. When consumers say they want more choice, more often than not, they actually want a better choosing experience. They want to feel confident of their preferences and competent during the choosing process; they want to trust and enjoy their choices, not question them."

The paradox of choice

A minha leitura de férias "The Origin of Wealth - Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics" de Eric Beinhocker tem sido um UAUUUU.

Uma das fontes bibliográficas citadas é o livro "The paradox of choice" the Barry Schwartz.

Encontrei esta apresentação que ilustra algumas das ideias do autor.