【龙腾网】“我的”就是“我们的”：消费是如何变化的
正文翻译
图
评论翻译
Knowledge@Wharton: This is such a timely topic for marketers. What made you want to study it and what questions were you trying to answer?
沃顿知识在线：对于营销人员来说，这是一个非常及时的话题。是什么让你想研究它？你想回答什么问题？
Deborah Small: There is this very classic and robust finding in the science of decision-making known as the “endowment effect.” The endowment effect is the fact that people value things more when they own them than they would if they were not in their possession. For instance, if you had a fancy bottle of wine in your possession, the amount of money you would be willing to [accept to] give it up is much higher than the amount of money you would be willing to pay to acquire it if you didn’t own it.
斯莫：在决策科学中有一个非常经典和有力的发现，被称为“禀赋效应”。禀赋效应是指当个人一旦拥有某项物品，那么他对该物品价值的评价要比未拥有之前大大提高。例如，如果你拥有一瓶名贵的葡萄酒，你愿意[接受]放弃它的金额要比你未拥有时愿意购买它的金额高得多。
These advances are no doubt fantastic and provide a lot of value to consumers, but we found that they’re missing some of the signature markers of ownership. One is tangibility: I can still experience music, but I don’t have a physical album. Second, permanence: When I use a rideshare, I don’t expect a long-term relationship with that car. We wrote this paper as a way to try to deepen our understanding of what is at stake here from a psychological ownership perspective.
这些进步无疑是了不起的，并为消费者提供了很多价值。但我们发现，他们缺少一些传统的所有权的特征。传统所有权的特征第一是有形，而现在我虽然可以体验音乐，但我没有实体唱片。第二是永久性。而现在我使用共享单车时，并不长期拥有那辆车。我们的研究是为了从心理所有权的角度加深对目前趋势的理解。
The second personal example is when I was younger, I was a DJ, and I have thousands of records in my house. I haven’t played them for a while. I’ve got a young child, a second on the way, and don’t have time to do that. But I still see them on the wall, and they remind me of a part of my identity and past. The music that I listen to now is no more or less important to me, but it somehow feels different because when I close my laptop or turn off my phone, it all disappears. There’s no permanence to that kind of content.
第二个例子是我年轻的时候是个DJ，家里有上千张唱片。我有一阵子没玩音乐了。现在我马上就要当妈妈了，没时间玩音乐。但我仍然在墙上看到这些唱片，它们让我想起了自己的一部分身份和过去的岁月。我现在也听音乐，但感觉有些不同，因为当我关上电脑或手机时，一切都消失了。它们似乎没有永久性。
This exchange that we’re making is extraordinarily convenient. I can be on the beach and pull down from the cloud the exact song I want to listen to, or the book I want to read. At the same time, it feels like we’re losing something — the feeling of mine. Our paper tries to understand and explore the consequences of its absence.
现在要听音乐或阅读非常方便。我可以躺在沙滩上，在手机上从云端听我想听的歌，想读的书。但是同时，我们失去了一些东西——那种感觉。本文试图理解和探讨其缺失的后果。
Knowledge@Wharton: In the paper, you identify two important changes in consumer behavior. The first one is a change from legal ownership of goods to legal access of goods. The second one is that material possession is being replaced with experiences. Can you explain those?
沃顿知识在线：在本文中，您确定了消费者行为有两个重要变化。第一个是从合法拥有商品到合法获取商品的转变。第二，物质占有正在被体验经历所取代。你能解释一下吗？
Knowledge@Wharton: The paper identifies three macro trends in marketing. What are those?
沃顿知识在线：本文指出了消费市场的三大趋势。那些是什么？
“Our possessions become part of our self. And we see ourselves, and thus our things, through rose-colored glasses.”–Carey Morewedge
“我们的财产成为自我的一部分。通过玫瑰色的眼镜，我们看到了它们，也看到了自己。”——凯里·莫韦奇
The second is the digitization of goods and services. Streaming is now the most popular way to consume music, and we see this kind of diffusion of digital consumption through books, email, films, magazines, maps, news, and television. Think about the last time that you opened a paper map or the last time that you sent letters. Most of our letters are exchanged in these kinds of digital communications. Those are not necessarily the ones that people consider identity-relevant (like a birthday card), but the kinds of goods that we used to think about as holding our cherished memories (like our communications, our photographs, our videos) are now all digital.
第二是商品和服务的数字化。流媒体是现在最流行的音乐消费方式，数字消费几乎囊括所有传播。想想上一次你打开纸质地图或者亲笔写信是什么时候？现在我们都是用电子邮件，发给朋友的是电子贺卡……过去曾用来保存珍贵记忆的物品（比如信件、照片、视频）现在都是数字化的。
The last trend is expansion of personal data. Our interactions, whether with government or with businesses, were often constrained to a record that was a single exchange. We had a receipt, and that was the data that existed about our behavior. Now, governments and firms have incredibly personal information about all facets of our lives: where we visited, who we were with, what photographs and videos we’ve taken, what’s our search history, what’s our medical or even our genetic information.
最后一个趋势是个人数据的扩张。过去个人与政府、与企业的互动，往往局限于单一的交易记录。现在，政府和各企业有令人难以置信的个人信息：我们去了哪里，和谁在一起，拍了什么照片和视频，搜索历史，医疗信息，甚至基因信息，都有记录。
The firm owns that data and is selling it to others for marketing purposes for loans or for credit cards. The question of who owns that kind of information is becoming increasingly relevant for consumers. That tension is being played out in really interesting kinds of policy arguments about what data should firms own, what data should consumers have rights to, and do we have a right to be forgotten. We wanted to map paths for the field to explore.
而企业拥有这些数据，则有可能出售给其它企业用于贷款或信用卡的营销目的。谁拥有这类信息对消费者来说变得越来越重要。目前有很多争论涉及企业应该拥有哪些数据，消费者应该有权获得哪些数据，以及我们是否有权被遗忘。我们想为这个领域探索更多路径。
Knowledge@Wharton: If psychological ownership is so beneficial in marketing, what can marketers do to preserve it?
沃顿知识在线：如果心理所有权在营销中如此有益，那么营销人员可以做些什么？
Small: It’s important to start with an understanding of the underlying features of psychological ownership that are particularly meaningful and important to consumers. Feeling in control. Being able to express who you are through the goods that you possess. There’s a very seminal academic article in marketing titled “Possessions and the Extended Self,” which is all about how our possessions help define who we are and signal who we are both to ourselves and to others. Everything from the type of car you drive to your brand of blue jeans says something about who you are. To answer your question about how marketers need to think about this, it’s going to vary a lot across firms and product categories. But marketers need to be thinking about ways to offer those benefits in other forms and ways to retain psychological ownership as they shift to these new models.
斯莫：重要的是，首先要了解心理所有权的基本特征，这些特征对消费者特别有意义和重要。比如：感觉有控制力；能够通过你拥有的物品来表达你是谁。在市场营销领域有一篇非常有开创性的研究论文，标题是“财产和扩展的自我”，它是关于财产如何帮助定义我们是谁，如何向自己和他人表明我们是谁。从你所驾驶的汽车类型到你的牛仔裤品牌，每件事都能说明你是谁。营销人员需要考虑如何以其他形式提供这些好处，以及如何在转向这些新模式时让用户保持心理所有权。
Can they find new ways to offer their consumers choices even when they’re in an access-based consumption model? Let’s say they’re sexting a car for a rental or a rideshare. Can they still have choices over the features of that car, so they feel more in control? Are there other opportunities for them to express who they are within these platforms, where they’re creating profiles of themselves and interacting with other consumers and firms?
It’s going to vary a lot, but I think the crux is for marketers to recognize that those are some of the key features that provide value to consumers, and to try to kind of creatively find ways to bring those back.
即使是在基于访问的消费模式下，他们能否找到新方式为消费者提供选择？假设他们选择租车或搭车，他们能对那辆车的功能有选择吗？这样他们就能感觉到更多的控制力。他们是否能在这些平台上表达自己的身份，创建个人资料，并与其他消费者和公司互动？
关键是营销人员要认识到，这些都是为消费者提供价值的一些关键功能，并尝试创造性地找到方法将这些功能融入到体验中。
“Everything from the type of car you drive to your brand of blue jeans says something about who you are. The question is: What is lost, psychologically-speaking, when much of consumption exists without ownership?”–Deborah Small
“从你驾驶的汽车类型到你的牛仔裤品牌，每件事都能说明你是谁。现在，从心理上讲，当顾客对所消费物品没有所有权时，他们失去了什么？“–黛博拉·斯莫
Morewedge: I would think first about the kinds of changes that are happening and how we find ways to either address them, offset them, or channel them. Think about the impermanence of things. If consumers access their health data through MyChart in the cloud, for example, are there ways to give them an extended feeling of permanence? If we’re losing the tangibility of material goods for these kinds of experiences, are there ways that we can offer control that aren’t necessarily physical, but that give us different kinds of control over the goods?
莫韦奇：我会首先考虑正在发生的变化，以及我们如何找到解决、抵消或引导这些变化的方法。想想事物的无常。例如，如果消费者通过云中访问健康数据，能否让他们有一种持久的感觉？如果失去了有形物品，有没有办法提供其它类型的控制权？
In experiential consumption, when you’re buying a trip from point A to point B in a rideshare like Uber or Lyft, it’s ambiguous who owns what. You’re purchasing a ride, but what do you really own in that kind of context? Give people some sense of clarity about what they own. For example, if you’re renting a house on Airbnb, do you get information about your upcoming visit and what you’re getting with your trip? Are there ways we can remind people of their usage history and all the kinds of experiences that they’ve had in these kinds of settings? Are there kinds of gamification we can use to show people a progression in their status through different kinds of programs? You’ve listened to this song 10 times! These were your top 10 songs on the streaming service in 2020. Give those experiences meaning, and connect them to memory cues, markers of having had them.
在体验式消费中，当你在优步或Lyft上打车或租车旅行时，谁拥有什么是模糊的。你买的是一项服务，在这种情况下你真正拥有什么？企业可以尝试让人们对自己的拥有提供一种清晰的感觉。
例如，如果你在Airbnb租房，你有没有得到关于你即将到访的信息，以及你的旅行会得到什么？我们有没有办法提醒人们他们的使用历史以及在这些环境中的各种经历？我们是否可以用游戏化的方式，通过不同的程序向人们展示他们的生活轨迹？这首歌你已经听了10遍了！这是在2020年流媒体服务中最受你喜爱的10首歌曲。给那些经历赋予意义，并把它们与记忆线索联系起来，作为个人生活的标志。
So, brands have to start thinking about whether or not they want to engage in vertical integration to keep consumers caring about their brand. Brands have to think about becoming commodities in cases where they were once these really strong markers of a consumer’s identity. Disney pulled most of its content from Netflix, for example, and started its own streaming platform. That may save Disney movies from becoming fungible with all the other programming for kids available through Netflix (or Amazon).
品牌商必须开始考虑是否要进行垂直整合，以保持消费者对品牌的关心。而品牌曾经是消费者身份的有力标志。例如，迪斯尼从Netflix获取了大部分内容，并创建了自己的流媒体平台。这或许可以避免迪斯尼电影与其他通过Netflix（或亚马逊）提供的儿童节目相互替代。
These kinds of threats are also giving rise to new kinds of opportunities. In many cases, we’re engaging in new ways of collaborative consumption with other people. We have these communities of people consuming things that didn’t exist before. In those cases, we’re moving from mine to ours. Can brands tie into thinking about how we get people to feel membership in a group of consumers? There’s a lot of work in marketing looking at these kinds of brand communities. Harley Davidson is always touted as a firm that successfully built up a community around its products. Reddit is a place these communities appear to be forming organically. Other brands may have to start to think about that kind of development and get consumers to think about their membership in a group rather than their use of a particular good.
这些趋势也带来了新机遇。我们正在与其他人合作消费。这是一种新模式。物品的标签从“我的”转变成“我们的”。品牌是否能让人们感觉自己是消费者群体中的一员？有很多企业都在关注建设品牌社区。哈雷戴维森一直被标榜为一家成功地围绕其产品建立社群的公司。Reddit网站是这些社群有机形成的地方。其他品牌可能不得不开始考虑这种趋势，让消费者对于社群更有认同感，而不仅仅是商品的使用者。
Knowledge@Wharton: I was surprised to read in your paper that there are some instances where companies would actually benefit if their customers do not have a sense of ownership in the product. What kind of instances are those?
沃顿知识在线：我很惊讶地读到，在某些情况下，如果客户对产品没有所有权意识，公司实际上会从中受益。这些是什么例子？
Morewedge: We identify four in the paper. The first is when changes in access rights are likely. The next is when consumers are the product, like lots of advertising-based and freemium services. The third is when it creates frictions in sharing markets. And the last is when service quality is inconsistent.
莫韦奇：我们在论文中确定了四种案例。首先是访问权可能发生变化的时候。其次是消费者本身是产品的时候，比如基于广告的免费服务模式。第三是在共享市场上制造摩擦的情况。最后是服务质量不一致。
Getting to this question of access rights, for example, Microsoft ended sales of e-books in 2019, and it also dexed and refunded all books purchased through that platform. So, if I built this library on Microsoft e-books, it’s suddenly gone and I get a check in the mail for what I purchased. That kind of sudden change in access, if consumers do feel strong psychological ownership, may leave them to feel a sense of loss or anger when their access rights are revoked. So, when the catalog that firms are offering in terms of these access-based models is highly fluid, they may not want consumers to feel psychological ownership if it’s going to disappear later on.
例如，谈到访问权问题，微软在2019年结束了电子书的销售，删除并退还了通过该平台购买的所有书籍。如果我在微软电子书上建立了个人图书馆，它突然消失了，我在邮件中收到了我购买的支票。这种突如其来的访问权变化，可能会让他们感到失落或愤怒。因此，当公司提供的这些基于访问的服务非常不稳定时，他们可能不想让消费者感到心理上的所有权。
“Brands have to think about becoming commodities, even in categories where brands were once strong signals of identity to consumers and to their social world.”–Carey Morewedge
“品牌必须考虑成为商品，即使在那些品牌曾经是消费者及其社交世界的强烈身份标志的类别中也是如此。”—凯里·莫韦奇
The second case is when firms are using consumers as the product. When firms are profiting from advertising or mining and selling consumer personal data, they’re going to benefit from cases in which consumers feel little psychological ownership for their behavior online. Amazon may not want you to think about all of the data they have about all of the records and transactions that you’ve engaged in. Google may not want you to think about your search history as something that you have a right to control. When those kinds of services are monetized, firms profit when consumers don’t feel like they have ownership rights.
第二种情况是公司将消费者作为产品。当公司从挖掘和销售消费者个人数据以获取广告收益中获利时，他们将从消费者对其在线行为的心理归属感很低的现状中获益。亚马逊可能不想让你完全拥有你所有交易的数据。谷歌可能不想让你对你的搜索历史有控制权。当这些服务被货币化时，当消费者觉得他们没有所有权，公司就会获利。
The third case would be when it creates frictions in sharing markets. For example, if I feel really strong psychological ownership for a particular brand of car, whether it be BMW or Toyota or Honda or Ford, that may create frictions for Uber when they try to give me a substitute like a Hyundai.
第三种情况是它会在共享市场上制造摩擦。例如，如果我对某一品牌的汽车（无论是宝马、丰田、本田还是福特）有着强烈的心理归属感，那么当优步试图给我一辆现代时，可能会让我不满。
The last case is when service quality is inconsistent. As Dr. Small mentioned, this kind of endowment effect, or feeling of psychological ownership, has a value-enhancing effect. We see the things that are ours through these rose-colored glasses. If I feel psychological ownership for something, I may have higher expectations for the performance of that product, and firms have difficulty living up to that. We know that customer satisfaction is performance minus expectations, and so it may not need to have that kind of value enhancement that psychological ownership engenders.
最后一种情况是服务质量不一致。正如斯莫尔博士所提到的，这种禀赋效应，或者说心理归属感，有一种价值提升效应。我们透过这些玫瑰色的眼镜看到属于我们的东西。如果我对某样东西有心理归属感，我可能会对该产品的性能有更高期望，而公司很难做到这一点。我们知道，客户满意度是绩效减去期望值，因此，企业不需要有那种心理所有权产生的期望值。
