Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Photography’

Consumer purchases from Internet retailing websites continue to expand, and their share out of total retail sales increases. Yet there is no real reason to declare the demise of physical, bricks-and-mortar stores and shops any time soon. Online purchases from e-stores (including through apps) indeed pose a stressing challenge to many physical stores, but the latter still hold a solid and dominant majority share of retail sales. Nonetheless, owners of physical stores will have to make changes to their mission and approach to retailing in order to answer effectively and successfully to the challenges from electronic retailing (‘e-tailing’).

The share of sales revenues from online retailing varies across categories (e.g., from groceries to electronics) yet the share overall out of total retailing revenues still floats around 12%-15% on average; there is also important variation between countries. Tensions are high particularly because of the threat from overarching e-tailers such as Amazon and Alibaba who grew their businesses in the virtual online environment. However, retailers do not have to choose to be either in the physical domain or the virtual domain: Many large and even medium bricks-and-mortar retailers are already double-operating through their physical stores and the Internet and mobile channels. Moreover, the master of Western e-tailing Amazon is lurking into the physical world with the establishment of its Amazon Go food stores, its venture into physical bookstores in selected US locations, and notably the acquisition of the food retail chain Whole Foods — what better testimony of the recognition that physical stores are still in need. All these observations should tell us that: (1) The lines between physical and virtual (electronic) retailing are blurred and the domains are not exclusive of each other; (2) It is a matter of linking between the domains where one can operate as an extension of the other (and it does not depend on which is the domain of origin); and (3) The domains are linked primarily by importing technology powered with data into the physical store’s space.

Technology alone, however, is not enough to resolve the challenges facing physical stores. Focusing on technology is like harnessing the carriage before the horses. The true and crucial question is: What will consumers of the coming future be looking for in stores? This is important, because consumers, especially the younger generations born after 1980, still have interest in shopping in bricks-and-mortar stores but they could be looking for something different from past decades, moreover given the digital options available to them now. The answers will have to come through rethinking and modifying the mission and strategy set for physical stores. The direction that seems most compelling for the mission is to shift emphasis from the merchandise offered in a store to the kind of experience offered in the store. The strategy may involve reconsideration and new planning of: (a) the product variety and volume of merchandise made available in the store; (b) interior design and visual merchandising; (c) scope and quality of service; and (d) the technologies applied in the store, all tailored to the convenience and pleasure of the shoppers.

This article will focus primarily on aspects of design of stores, including  interior design and decoration, layout, and visual merchandising (i.e., visual display of products); together with additional sensory elements (e.g., lighting, music, texture, scent) they shape the atmosphere in the store or shop. Yet it should be noted that the four strategy components suggested above are tied and influence each other in creating the kind of experience a retailer desires the customers-shoppers to have while in-store.

Shopping experiences in a store rely essentially on the emotions the store invokes in the consumers-shoppers. Notwithstanding the sensorial and cognitive reactions of shoppers to the interior scene of the store, the positive and pleasant emotions the shoppers feel will most likely be those that motivate them to stay longer and choose more products to purchase (further desired behaviours may include recommendation to friends and posting photos from the store on social media). Prior and close enough to consumption itself, the personal shopping and purchasing experience may invoke a range of positive emotions such as joy, optimism, love (non-romantic), peacefulness, and surprise; of course there also are potential negative emotions that retailers would wish to reduce (e.g., anger, worry, sadness)[*].

The need for shift in emphasis in physical stores is well stated by Lara Marrero, a strategy director with Gensler, a British design firm: “It used to be a place where people bought stuff. Now it is a state where a person experiences a brand and its offerings”. Marrero, who is leading the area of global retail practice at the firm, predicts a future change in mentality of shoppers from ‘grab and go’ to ‘play and stay’ (“Retail 2018: Trends and Predictions”, Retail Focus, 15 December 2017). This predicted shift is still inconsistent with a current retail interpretation of linking the digital and physical domains through schemes of ‘click-and-collect’ online orders at a physical store. Additionally, consumers nowadays conduct more research online on products they are interested in before coming to a store: The question is if a retailer should satisfy with letting the consumer just ask for his or her preferred product at the store or encourage the consumer-shopper to engage and interact more in-store, whether with assistance from human staff or digital utilities, before making a purchase — the push may have to come first from the consumers. Marrero further notes the social function of stores: retail environments become a physical meeting point for consumers to share brand experiences. Retailers will have to allow sufficient space for this in the store.

In order to generate new forms of shopper experiences the setting of a store’s scene also has to change and adapt to the kind of experience one seeks to create. New styles and patterns of in-store design are revealed through photo images of retail design projects, and the stories the images accompany, on websites of design magazines (e.g., VMSD of the US, Retail Focus of the UK). They demonstrate changes in the designing approach to the interior environment of stores and shops.

A striking aspect in numerous design exemplars is the tendency to create more spacious store scenes. It does not necessarily mean that the area of stores is larger but that the store’s layout and furnishing are organised to make it feel more spacious,  for example by making it look lighter and allowing shoppers to move more easily around. Additionally, it implies ‘loading’ the store’s areas which are accessible to customers with less merchandise. First, merchandise would be displayed mostly on fixtures attached to walls around the perimeters of the store, but even then it should not look too crowded (i.e., in appreciation that oftentimes ‘less is more’ for consumers). Second, fewer desks and other display fixtures are positioned across the floor to leave enough room for shoppers to walk around conveniently (and possibly feel more ‘free’). In fashion stores, for instance, this would also apply to  ‘isles’ of demonstrated dressing displays. Third, desks should not be packed with merchandise, and furthermore, at least one desk should be left free from merchandise — leave enough surface for shoppers and sellers to present and look at merchandise and to converse about the options. In some cases, it may allow for the shoppers to socialise and consult among themselves around a desk at the store (e.g., inspired by Apple stores). Opportunities to socialise can be enhanced in larger stores  by allocating space for a coffee & wine bar, for instance, which may serve also sandwiches, patisseries and additional drinks. Stores would be designed to look and feel more pleasant and enjoyable for consumers-shoppers to hang around, contemplate their options and make purchase decisions.

  • Large stores that spread over multiple floors with facades turning outwards to the street may fix the facades with glass sheets, and in order not to block natural daylight from entering into the store they would place desks and mobile hangers or other low shelf fixtures along the windows.

Modissa Fashion Store set for Christmas

In the new-era store not all merchandise the store may offer to sell needs to be displayed in the ‘selling areas’ accessible to shoppers. Retailers may have to retreat from the decades long paradigm that everything on display is the inventory, and vice versa. It is worth considering: First, some merchandise can be displayed as video on screens, and thus also add to the ‘show’ in the store; Second, shoppers can use digital catalogues in the store to find items currently not on display — such items may still be available in stock on premises or they may be ordered within 24 hours. But furthermore, customers may be able to coordinate online or through an app with a store near them to see certain products at a set time; up-to-date analyses of page visits and sales on a retailer’s online store can tell what products are most popular, subsequently guaranteeing that the physical stores keep extra items of them in stock on premises.

Here are references to a few exemplars for illustration of actual store design projects published in design magazines’ websites:

Burberry, London — The flagship store of luxury fashion brand Burberry on Regent Street is highlighted for both the use of space in its design and the employment of digital technology in the store. A large open space atrium (of an older time theatre) occupies the centre of the store (four floors, 3000 sqm), impressive in how Burberry allowed to keep it. The digitally integrated store is commended for its fusion of a ‘digital world’ into its bricks-and-mortar environment: a large high-resolution screen plays video in the atrium, synchronised with a hundred digital screens around the store, some 160 iPads (e.g., for finding items on the catalogue that may not be on display), and RFID tags attached to garments (VMSD, 18 December 2012).

Hogan, Milano — The footwear ’boutique’ store (277 sqm in via Montenapoleone) is designed to reflect the brand, “luxury but accessible”. The store’s mission has been described as follows: “Hogan is a lifestyle brand, championing contemporary culture. The store therefore needed to be dynamic, working hard to adapt from retail space to live event or gallery space”. Characteristic of the store: tilted surfaces for display, lying on top of each other like fallen-down domino bricks; and an animated display of patterns by LED lighting behind frosted glass walls — they both reflect movement, the former just symbolically while the latter more dynamically, to “express the dynamism of the city”. The store of Hogan also fosters social activity around its host bar and customization bar (Retail Focus, 15 February 2018).

Black by Dixon’s, Birmingham (UK) — The technology retail concept aspires to make “the geeky more stylish and exciting”. Digital technology is “dressed” in fashionable design, aiming at the more sophisticated Apple-generation (distinctive in the images are the mannequins “sitting” on desks as props, and colour contrasts on a dark background). (VMSD, 24 May 2011.)

Stella McCartney, Old Bond Street, London — The re-established flagship store resides in an 18th century historic-listed building (four floors, 700 sqm). Products such as dresses and handbags are displayed (sampled) across the store in different halls. The design and lighting give a very loose feeling. Refreshingly, the ground floor features an exhibit of black limestones and “carefully selected rocks” from the family’s estate, a piece of nature in-store (Retail Focus, 14 June 2018).

Admittedly, some of the more distinctive and impressive design exemplars belong to up-scale and luxury stores, but they do give direction and ideas for creating different experiences in retail spaces, even if less lavishly. Furthermore, technology can enrich the store and add a dimension of activity in it. Yet it is part of the whole design plan, not necessarily its central pillar, if at all.

Installing digital technology in a store does not mean importing the Internet and e-store into the physical store. Features of digital technology can be employed in-store in a number of ways, and the use of an online catalogue is just one of them. There is no wisdom for the physical store in trying to mimic Internet websites or compete with them. It should find ways, instead, to implement digital technologies that best suit the store’s space and transform the experience of its visiting shoppers.

Moreover, the store owner should identify those aspects that are lacking in the virtual online store and leverage them in the bricks-and-mortar store (e.g., immediacy, non inter-mediated interaction with products, sensorial stimulations other than visual and audio, feeling fun or relaxed). Thereof, the store should borrow certain technological amenities that can help to link between the domains and make the experience in-store more familiar, convenient, interesting, entertaining or exciting. According to an opinion article in Retail Focus on “The Future of High Street” (Lyndsey Dennis, 25 April 2018): “To draw customers back to brick-and-mortar, [retailers] need to rethink how they use their physical space and store formats. The key is to give customers something they can’t get online, whether that’s information, entertainment, or service“. Advanced technologies such as Virtual reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) are part of the repertoire that are increasingly introduced in high street stores [e.g., AR applied in the fitting rooms of Burberry’s store, triggered by the RFID tags].

Matt Alderton, writing in ArchDaily magazine of architecture and design (25 November 2015), details key technologies and how they are implemented in stores to create new possibilities and leverage shopper experiences. One group of technologies can provide vital data to retailers which in turn can be applied to interact with shoppers and return useful information to them (e.g., beacons, RFID tags, visual lighting communications). The second group includes display technologies that may be enriching with information and entertaining to shoppers: for example, VR and AR, touch screens, and media projected on a surface such as table-top which thus becomes a touch screen. Alderton clearly sees consumer need for physical stores, the question is how consumers would want them: “What the data says is that shoppers want to move forward by going back: Like their forebears who visited Harrods, they crave emporiums that are experiential, not transactional, in nature“. (See also images in this article as they portray new-fashioned designs in space and layout; notably these stores feel less crowded by merchandise, and some show in-store digital displays.)

These are challenging times for bricks-and-mortar stores. New possibilities are emerging for physical stores to grow and thrive, yet they will have to adapt to changed shopping and purchasing patterns of consumers and develop new kinds of experiences that appeal to them. It should be a combined effort, with contribution from interior design of stores and visual merchandising, utilities and amenities based on digital technologies implemented in the store, and the support and assistance by human personnel. The in-store design is especially important in setting the scene — in appearance, comfort and appeal — that will shape shoppers’ experiences. Retailing could evolve as far as into new forms of ‘experiential shopping’.

Ron Ventura, Ph.D. (Marketing)

Reference: [*] Measuring Emotions in the Consumption Experience; Marsha L. Richins, 1997; Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24 (September), pp. 127-149.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Ever so often, in many and different places, people take photos. The immediacy of access to cameras on smartphone devices has made photography a ubiquitous and more casual activity. The awareness and sensitivity of people to visual scenes and materials has increased, and photo images especially play a greater role in our lives. When people take their own photos to capture their experiences, this activity may become an integral part of the experience. It raises therefore an interesting question, how an experience could be subjectively affected by the act of taking photos whilst the experience is happening.

Almost obviously, our tendency to take photos is stronger during touristic experiencesAscona: Promenade on Lago Maggiore away from home while travelling in our own country and furthermore on visits to foreign countries. The experience could take place on holiday in a major city when touring its main streets and famous sites, or on vacation in a holiday resort in nature, going on a trip to the top of mountains, near a lake or along the sea-shore. However, we may take photos during more ordinary experiences such as dining in a restaurant (e.g., photo-taking of appetizing food dishes); in a party or family gathering; while playing (e.g., creative games like Lego); watching parades, sports events or other festivities; and even during a shopping tour. In those experiences we could be more passive observers or more active players, which may influence any additional involvement in photo-taking and its effect on the overall experience.

Kristin Diehl, Gal Zauberman and Alixandra Barasch (2016) investigated in-depth the effect that taking photos by consumers during an experience may have on their enjoyment from the experience: whether it amplifies enjoyment, or instead dampens it, and how the level of enjoyment varies in different conditions. Furthermore, they examined a proposed mechanism where engagement in an experience mediates enjoyment: in positive experiences, when individuals are more intensively engaged or immersed in the experience, it may elevate their enjoyment; thereby, to the extent that taking photos increases engagement, it would also heighten enjoyment. The researchers consider two routes of influence: (a) photo-taking competes with the ‘source’ experience by causing attention shifts, thus reducing engagement and enjoyment from the experience; (b) photo-taking helps in directing and focusing more attention on visual aspects of the ‘source’ experience, leading to increased engagement and consequently heighten enjoyment.

The photos taken may have subsequent benefits to individuals such as in aiding with memory of experienced events at a later time (i.e., serving as memory cues) and in showing photos of their experiences to relatives and friends (i.e., social benefit), but the researchers focus specifically on effect of the act of taking a photo at the time of the experience. Their research entailed nine studies (3 field studies & 6 lab experiments), using a range of methodologies and experience-contexts.

A most typical touristic experience is a city bus tour — consider riding a double-decker bus on an open-air top floor. Diehl and her colleagues organised actual bus tours in Philadelphia for photo takers and non-photo takers. They succeeded in showing in this setting that photo takers enjoyed their touristic experience more than those who did not take photos. They also obtained some evidence that the photo takers may have felt more engaged during the experience though the effect was statistically too weak. (Note: In order to exclude any benefits from using photos after the bus tour all participants were disallowed to take their personal cameras or smartphones with them and the assigned  ‘photo-takers’ were given instead a digital camera with a new memory card, yet they could not keep the card afterwards).

The researchers conducted a second field study, this time in the context of a casual lunch (i.e., it was not suggested the food was especially attractive to photograph). In this study the results were already stronger. Consistent with the bus tour study, photo-takers enjoyed the lunch experience more than those not taking photos, but in addition the photo-takers were found significantly more engaged. The setting was sufficient to support just in part that greater engagement mediates the higher enjoyment felt by those taking photos. (Note: In this study no physical restrictions were imposed — those instructed to take photos could use their own cameras or smartphones).

Lab experiments create less realistic experiences since they are only simulated, and the act of taking a photo is also simulated (i.e., a camera icon and a mouse click). However, a controlled experiment can facilitate surfacing the effects of interest while testing for the influence of additional factors. It is acknowledged that the researchers have already shown there is ground to their expected effects on enjoyment in real-life settings.

A lab experiment of simulated bus tours (using videos of tours in Hollywood, California, and London, UK), found support that photo-takers enjoyed their bus tour experiences significantly more, as well as felt significantly more engaged in them, than those not taking photos. Furthermore, there also was support that engagement fully mediates or connects positively between taking photos and enjoyment. Moreover, memory of the greater enjoyment of those taking photos persists as long as a week after the experience. (Note: Remembered enjoyment is to be distinguished from remembered content of the experience).

So, does taking photos indeed work to focus greater attention on what people experience and thus enhances their engagement and increases their enjoyment? The researchers provide important evidence with the help of eye-tracking (field study, museum exhibit) that taking a photo channels more attention to the objects of interest in the experience. In particular, it directs more attention to relevant visual aspects of the experience, that is, to the exhibit artifacts vis-à-vis other objects (e.g., information displays) in the exhibit hall. First, significant effects of greater enjoyment and engagement by photo-takers, and the mediation function of engagement, are replicated. Second, taking photos leads to spending a relatively greater time fixating on the artifacts (as proportion of total duration of fixations) compared to visiting without taking photos. Visitors taking a photo of an artifact fixate for a longer duration on it compared with those who only watch it; no such differences were found for other objects. Third, it is not only the duration of fixations but also the number of fixations dedicated to artifacts that are relatively higher among those taking photos compared to those who do not. (It should be noted, however, that measures were aggregated across ‘exhibit artifacts’ versus ‘other objects’, and not verified for every single artifact being photographed or not.)

Scenes for photography can be very different, some are rich with detail, light and colour (e.g., a lakeside landscape), others being more monotonic or homogenous (e.g., a vase or a person against a dark uniform background). This difference in experience seems to matter little with regard to enjoyment or engagement when taking photos. Comparing between bus tours (Hollywood/London) and pop/rock concerts (performing against a plain and non-changing background), it is found that similarly in those experiences those taking photos enjoy the experience more and feel more engaged than non-photo takers, regardless of the type of experience (full mediation was also supported).

Any indication that participants in the experiment have enjoyed the concert somewhat more than bus tours did not lead to any consistent conclusions; it may be due more to a music concert being more energizing than a city bus tour at least in idea, especially if we take into account also the experience of the music not captured in a photograph. But in real-life concerts of performing artists the viewers more usually today record video clips, not still photographs, by simply raising the smartphone above the head and filming. It is hard to say in these circumstances how much they may lose of the experience at all if they watch it through the screen and how it may affect their attention and enjoyment. Dealing with the smartphone or tablet to check the videos during the performance may distract them somewhat more. Yet, it could be that viewers recording videos on their devices may be disturbing more to other people in the audience than their own enjoyment of the experience.

Expo Milano 2015: Dining Bar (Argentina)

EXPO Milano 2015: For illustration of experience

We may find ourselves in different positions in experiences: Imagine taking a boat cruise on a lake, standing on the deck viewing the landscape around, or watching a parade on a maid road, looking from the side of the road — in these events one is primarily a passive observer. However, one becomes an active participant in the event, for example, of playing a creative game such as building Lego models or possibly visiting a museum exhibit that allows learning by using interactive displays and tools. As Diehl and colleagues suggest, it may have two implications: (a) the ‘active’ experience is in origin more entertaining and enjoyable so there is less to gain by additionally taking photos; (b) engaging in the task of taking photos interferes with participation in the main activity. The researchers applied creative arts-and-crafts projects (e.g., building an Eiffel Tower from wafers and icing): to make conditions comparable, they assigned participants to either actively building the tower model or to passively observing someone else building the same kind of model.

Indeed, taking photos during the experience makes a difference in increasing engagement and enjoyment only for those observing the project and not for those who are actively building the model. Photo takers who actively built the model were also more inclined to report that taking photos during the experience interfered with their project compared to those who only observed and took photos. On the other hand, the latter took more photos (about ten on average) compared with those who tried to build the project and take photos simultaneously (5.5 on average). Reasonably observers were more free to take photos and enjoy it as well. While taking photos did not increase enjoyment of the ‘builders’, there is also no evidence that it decreased it. It could be a little disappointing as we may expect that taking photos as we progress may enhance our sense of pride and satisfaction with our creation taking form — a sort of ‘I Built It Myself’ effect (following an “I Designed It Myself” effect by Franke, Schreier and Kaiser, 2010). Two requirements may be needed: first, that the ‘builder’ is of course successful during his or her task, and second, that by intermittently advancing with the project and stopping for a minute when progress is made to take a photo, it helps to minimise interference or distraction.

This topic brings to mind a particular concern, when the task of photography intervenes in the ‘source’ experience, and potentially disrupts it. Diehl and her colleagues cleverly distinguish between the functional-physical act of taking photos (i.e., operating a camera) and the mental process driving behind it (i.e., planning  the photos). It may be argued in this regard that the impact may be different on people taking photos with a smartphone or tablet device, a compact camera, or a more complex single-lens-reflex (SLR) camera. Also, more dedicated amateur photographers, with greater interest and photographic skills, may approach taking photos during an experience differently from others. This issue unfortunately does not receive an adequate answer in the research.

The researchers test two kinds of suspected interferences that may disrupt or distract photo takers from the main experience they engage in: (1) physical — by assuming one would have to carry and hold a bulky digital SLR camera (represented in the experiment just by a larger camera icon); and (2) functional — by enabling the photographer also to delete unsatisfactory photos right after taking them. The results have shown that with medium-interference (‘holding SLR’) the enjoyment of these photo-takers was in-between those taking photos as above and those not taking photos, not significantly different from either. Yet, with high-interference (‘SLR + deletion’) enjoyment was close and not statistically different from non-photo takers and lower compared with ‘regular’ photo-takers. Corresponding findings were obtained for engagement. Attending to delete photos is the task that appears to truly distract photo takers from the main experience (like checking one’s video during a concert). Holding an SLR camera should not disturb so much dedicated amateur photographers (with some exceptions of extra equipment) but certain operations in taking photos may demand additional attention that could indeed compete with the subject experience.

Nevertheless, the researchers demonstrate in another experiment that the mental process of thinking about taking photos and planning them is more crucial than the functional act of taking the photos. Planning to take photos alone increased enjoyment just as for those actually taking photos, compared with those not involved in any way in taking photos. In other words, planning to taking photos “led to similar levels of enjoyment as actually taking photos”. Reported engagement was similarly heightened when planning to take photos. For more dedicated amateur photographers planning the photos to be taken is a key part of the activity and may not be easy to separate from some functions (e.g., choices of composition, focal object, exposure and speed). Yet the photography-related activity may not be viewed as an interference but as an integral part of the whole experience, a way of living the experience more deeply and vividly.

When the experience is perceived as negative, taking photos would also increase engagement, but in this case it will result in lower enjoyment compared to those not taking photos. The increased engagement means more attention of the photo takers becomes focused on negative aspects of the experience.

The researchers study a specific mechanism of mediation by engagement between taking photos and enjoyment. But many consumers may receive their satisfaction and joy from recording their experience to refresh their memories later through the photos, perhaps more so if they are less interested in photography per se. Moreover, consumers increasingly take photos with the intention of uploading them to social media networks (e.g., Facebook, Instagram) for sharing with their acquaintances, close and far. Diehl and colleagues are not convinced, based on an initial survey, that people anticipate such benefits while taking the photos. Nevertheless, they do not exclude this possibility: they note that “individuals presumably take photos in part because they expect that reviewing those photos in the future will provide them with additional enjoyment” and such forward-looking behaviour may enhance their immediate enjoyment from the experience. In their judgement many consumers do not anticipate such an effect. They do note, however, that many marketers also forbid taking photos on their premises because they seem to believe that taking photos ruins individuals’ experiences.

The research of Diehl, Zauberman and Barasch is interesting and refreshing on a topic not studied often. It shows from different angles how taking photos enhances the enjoyment of consumers in positive experiences through increased engagement (i.e., focus more attention, feeling more deeply immersed in the experience). Taking photos could plausibly be seen as less interfering or disrupting to people the closer they perceive this activity as complementary to the experience itself, and especially so for those more interested in photography. Marketers should be less reluctant to let consumers taking photos since it is more likely to make them enjoy the experience better. Consumers have to learn when is the best timing to turn to taking photos so as to enjoy it the most as part of the whole experience.

Ron Ventura, Ph.D. (Marketing)

Reference:

How Taking Photos Increases Enjoyment of Experiences; Kristin Diehl, Gal Zauberman, and Alixandra Barasch, 2016; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111 (2), pp. 119-140.

Read Full Post »