The company “Graze” offers the service of delivering a box
of healthy snacks to wherever you want it, each time giving a different
selection of products. The box is split into four sections, in which they will
place a different healthy item, depending on the consumer’s preference as
indicated on their website. However, what sets Graze’s marketing strategy apart
from the rest of the field, is its price structure. The offer of “one free box”
is renowned when people hear the company’s name, and this provides an
attractive offer for people to begin their engagement with the brand. Following
this, the company provides a number of reduced price boxes, hence increasing
the price slightly, but still offering the same excitement that the consumer experienced
when opening their first box. Once the consumer has received a number of
reduced price items, the company begins charging the full amount, and if the
user does not cancel their auto-delivery account, they will continue to be
charged (and will continue to receive the product).
There are two reasons why Graze’s strategy is especially persuasive,
in convincing people to stay with their company. The first, simply, is that people
become used to the boxes arriving; it becomes part of their schedule.
Additionally, the effort for cancelling may not be deemed worth the hassle.
However, the strategy is also an example of a technique known as low-balling.
This term is used to describe an instance where a price is offered that does
not reflect what the company intends to charge, but follows it with larger
costs. This is effective as people enjoy the benefits of the service they are
receiving, hence when the extra cost is presented; they change their views and
accept that the price is worth paying. The underlying psychological theory
behind this is that of Cognitive Dissonance; people experience discomfort
through possessing two conflicting cognitions, so they change either their
behaviour or cognition to retrieve the cognitive balance (Festinger, 1957).
From the literature, a study which demonstrated this effect
was carried out by Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, and Miller (1978). In their experiment, they asked
participants to agree to participate in a study, of which 56% percent of them
agreed to. After they had agreed, the researchers revealed that the experiment
would commence at seven in the morning, and that they could still withdraw if
they desired. However, 95% still turned up on the day of the experiment. In a
second condition, people were informed straight away that the experiment would
take place at 7 in the morning, and following this information only 24% wanted
to participate. This shows that an initial low offer can influence agreement
rates in future exchanges.
Cialdini,
R. B., Cacioppo, J. T., Bassett, R., & Miller, J. A. (1978). Low-ball
procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 463.
Festinger,
L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.