Ethical fashion brands still fight the stigma of being unstylish and expensive. It is even more important that they place a focus on educating their customers and potential customers. This article sums up the most important research insights from the paper “Unraveling the Customer Education Paradox: When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?” and shares ideas on why customer education can offer opportunities for ethical fashion brands.
The research paper was published in the Journal of Service Research (2017) by Simon J. Bell, Seigyoung Au and Andreas B. Eisingerich. In the paper, the authors collect detailed research regarding customer education and further investigate to understand the circumstances under which customer education ties customers more closely to a firm or encourages them to leave.
The Outdated Cloudiness Strategy
Managers have long implied — albeit without openly admitting — that cloudiness is a good strategy (The Economist 2014). Many believed that sharing too much about the workings of a firm could damage its competitive advantage. This is based on the fear that providing information and being transparent would enable customers to compare competitors’ offers or even produce the service on their own (e.g. Heilman, Bowman, and Wright 2000).
However, in today’s customer-driven market environment in which customers prefer transparent and “honest brands” (Liu et al. 2015; NBC News 2016), the standing of the cloudiness strategy is becoming increasingly debatable. Furthermore, current research states that despite honesty, customers wish for brands that make their lives easier (Park, MacInnis, and Eisingerich 2016).
The Ethical Fashion Consumer
Establishing a conscious fashion lifestyle can be challenging. Consumers who not only wish to buy ethical fashion — which is produced in a socially and ecologically respectful manner — but additionally want to fully integrate conscious fashion behavior into their daily life need to devote strong effort to gathering information. For such consumers, conscious fashion does not start with shopping. Increasingly more consumers are aware that not only what they buy but also how they treat their clothing is part of the deal.
In order to fully integrate a conscious fashion behavior in day-to-day life, consumers need to follow a sort of learn-care-organize-invest-shoulder approach. First and foremost, consumers need knowledge and learn new behaviors. This starts with thinking about how to wash clothes properly, in a clean yet energy-efficient manner. Furthermore, they need information about what sustainable clothing means and where they can find it. Today, it is not standard that consumers receive this sort of information. Therefore, a first challenge for consumers is to obtain such information.
Second, consumers must translate this knowledge into action through taking care of their clothing. In today’s throwaway culture, clothing is perceived as a consumable good that quickly wears out, rather than a durable good that yields utility over time. Caring for clothes means storing them properly and using the appropriate wash program to keep the clothes in good condition for longer. Furthermore, fixing damaged pieces instead of throwing them away is one way to prolong a garment’s lifespan.
Third, organizing and structuring one’s wardrobe can help consumers to maintain an overview of their clothes. New combinations can be discovered, and the wardrobe can be used in a more versatile way, which leads to consumers enjoying their clothes for longer.
Fourth, as consumers invest time to incorporate a conscious fashion habit into their life, shopping moves away from the mere consumption of clothing. Through spending time researching in advance where to buy their clothing instead of simply buying what is in front of them, buying a new piece of clothing becomes more of an investment.
Fifth, conscious consumers know that the lifespan of a garment does not end when they no longer want to keep it; rather, they are aware that they have a responsibility for the clothes that they own. Hence, they want to take responsibility to ensure that the garment is reintegrated in the circular economy.
Making Their Life Easier Through Education
Understanding these behavioral tendencies and values opens possibilities for ethical fashion brands regarding customer education. For instance, one possibility is that ethical fashion brands can make their customers’ lives easier though education, thus supporting their customers in achieving their goal of a conscious fashion lifestyle. By following the learn-care-organize-invest-shoulder schema – which can be used to identify consumer challenges – more support options can be identified.
For example, brands can educate consumers through disclosing their ways of working in an honest and understandable way. The educational support can also extend beyond education about the physical products that they sell. Nowadays, it is not standard that consumers receive sufficient information about how to properly care for the clothing that they buy. Equipping the customer with information on how to properly care for their clothing will save them time researching such details.
There is emerging evidence that the process of educating customers has a positive impact on customer trust and loyalty. Therefore, efforts expended by individuals and organizations to enhance customer education are seen as a valuable augmentation to the core service offering (Bell and Eisingerich 2007; Burton 2002; Hennig-Thurau 2000).
Nowadays, fewer people have sewing skills, whereby simply fixing a small hole or sewing on a button can be challenging. While for older generations letting out or taking in trousers was a quick fix, younger generations have neither the skills nor the tools to mend garments. This could be another opportunity for ethical clothing brands. Educating customers regarding how or where clothing can be fixed or even offering the service will build trust through simplifying the customer’s life.
Making Their Life Easier Through Co-offering
The increased popularity of co-creation and co-production business models in service research and practice (e.g. Dong et al. 2015; Mende and Van Doorn 2015; Merlo, Eisingerich, and Auh 2014; Moeller et al. 2013) states that concerted efforts by firms to educate customers may be necessary to ensure their successful transformation from product- to customer-centric organizations. Indeed, customer knowledge has been noted as a “valuable asset” (Shah et al. 2006, p. 115) that can be leveraged for enhanced cross-selling opportunities, while customer knowledge or expertise has been found to be a key determinant of involvement in service co-production processes (Auh et al. 2007).
This insight into service research and practice opens up opportunities when applied to the conscious fashion consumer. As already stated, this sort of consumer is more sensitive to the fact that clothing should not be perceived as a consumable but rather more as a durable good that yields utility over time. When an ethical fashion lifestyle is completely integrated into a person’s life, the need for service regarding clothing is created.
In order to deliver the full experience to the customer, ethical fashion brands can provide their clients with additional products that help to realize fully ethical behavior, e.g. selling ecological washing powder, practical sewing tools or equipment to properly store their garments. Smaller brands can also stock up in offerings and level up their service through partnerships with other brands that have complementary products or services.
To summarize, being aware of the importance of customer education can create new business opportunities for ethical fashion brands, especially since they have to fight extra challenges and price perception, where they compete against regular brands. It can be assumed that customers are willing to pay more for brands that make their life easier, especially when such customers want to incorporate a conscious fashion lifestyle. Accordingly, customer education and enhanced service can increase a customer’s price perception.
For regular updates, follow #FAFAZH and @fairfashionzh on Instagram!
Sources:
Auh, Seigyoung, Simon J. Bell, Colin S. McLeod, and Eric Shih (2007), “Co-Production and Customer Loyalty in Financial Services,” Journal of Retailing, 83 (3), 359-370.The
Bell, Simon J., Seigyoung Auh, and Karen Smalley (2005), “Customer Relationship Dynamics: Service Quality and Customer Loyalty in the Context of Varying Levels of Customer Expertise and Switching Costs,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33 (2), 169-183.
Burton, Dawn (2002), “Consumer Education and Service Quality: Conceptual Issues and Practical Implications,” Journal of Services Marketing, 16 (2), 125-142.
Dong, Beibei, K. Sivakumar, Kenneth R. Evans, and Shaoming Zou (2015), “Effect of Customer Participation on Service Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Participation Readiness,” Journal of Service Research, 18 (2), 160-176.
Economist (2014), “The Openness Revolution,” (accessed April 23, 2019), [available at http://www.economist.com/news/business/21636070-multinationals-are-forced-reveal-more-about-themselves-where-should-limits.]
Heilman, Carrie M., Douglas Bowman, and Gordon P. Wright (2000), “The Evolution of Brand Preferences and Choice Behaviors of Consumers New to a Market,” Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (May), 139-155.
Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten (2000), “Relationship Quality and Customer Retention through Strategic Communication of Customer Skills,” Journal of Marketing Management, 16 (1-3), 55-79.
Bell, Simon, Au, Seigyoung and Eisingerich, Andreas B. (2017) “Unraveling the Customer Education Paradox: When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 20(3) 306-321)
Liu, Yeyi, Andreas B. Eisingerich, Seigyoung Auh, Omar Merlo, and Hae Eun Chun (2015), “Service Firm Performance Transparency: How, When, and Why Does it Pay off?” Journal of Service Research, 18 (4), 451-467.
Mende, Martin and Jenny van Doorn (2015), “Coproduction of Transformative Services as a Pathway to Improved Consumer Well-Being: Findings from a Longitudinal Study on Financial Counseling,” Journal of Service Research, 18 (3), 351-368.
Merlo, Omar, Andreas B. Eisingerich, and Seigyoung Auh (2014), “Why Customer Participation Matters,” MIT Sloan Management Review, 55 (2), 81-88.
Moeller, Sabine, Robert Ciuchita, Dominik Mahr, Gaby Odekerken-Schröder, and Martin Fassnacht (2013), “Uncovering Collaborative Value Creation Patterns and Establishing Corresponding Customer Roles,” Journal of Service Research, 16 (4), 471-487.
NBC News (2016), “Consumers Prefer ‘Honest’ Brands—And Are Willing to Pay Extra for Them,” (accessed May 5, 2016), [available at https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/consu%20mers-prefer-honest-brands-are-willing-pay-extra-them-n644916.]
Park, C. Whan, Deborah J. MacInnis, Joseph Priester, Andreas B. Eisingerich, and Dawn Iacobucci (2010), “Brand Attachment and Brand Attitude Strength: Conceptual and Empirical Differentiation of Two Critical Brand Equity Drivers,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (November), 1-17
Shah, Denish, Roland T. Rust, A. Parasuraman, Richard Staelin, and George S. Day (2006), “The Path to Customer Centricity,” Journal of Service Research, 9 (2), 113-124.
