UH Certificate in Strategic Foresight alum Robert Moran, now a quoted me around “enoughness” in his piece “The Future of Communications Research for PR Week. Bob is now a partner at Brunswick Group, where he leads the insights function for the Americas. Alas, a subscription is required to read the full article. The gist of my contribution is that “enoughness” describes a new, post-crash consumer ethos with an edge, as consumers have had enough of the consumer rat-race and “corpspeak” and now they want simplicity. I’ve described enoughness as one of the five key changes in the emerging consumer landscape. I borrowed the term from my friend and colleague Marcus Barber at Looking Up, Feeling Good. He’s done great work on the future of values and readers of this blog are sure to find his work of great interest. Andy Hines
Five Key Changes in the Future Consumer Landscape: #5 Enoughness
ConsumerShift identifies the changing consumer values and external trends that are remaking the consumer landscape. Five key themes form the core of these changes, making “A CASE” for change. Fifth, is “E”: Enoughness.
Think of enoughness as voluntary simplicity with a bit of an edge to it. Whereas voluntary simplicity suggested a benevolent, altruistic adoption of a simpler lifestyle, enoughness gets to a similar end point, but only partly from choice, as necessity in the form of the Great Recession is mixed into the equation. The recession has forced people to confront their consumption patterns.
People are accepting and even embracing a need limits—“maybe growth can’t continue forever?” There is a sense of “having enough” or being fed up with the status quo. It goes beyond material goods to the real precious resource of the next decade: time! People feel their lives are getting out of control, and they want to take back that control and set limits. The recession has provided the “perfect” opportunity to experiment with doing with less—stuff and activities. It may turn out in hindsight, that this is the most impactful of the five thematic changes in the consumer landscape. Organizations counting on population growth and a continued desire for “more” to meet their growth numbers are going to lose on both counts in the emerging consumer landscape. Andy Hines
Changing Values and “Enoughness” Suggest Economic Stimulus Won’t Work
Economic stimulus is in the news a lot. A recent New York Times piece noted that: “Since the economy began to falter in 2007, Congress has passed what amounts to three stimulus bills — a bipartisan $158 billion package of tax cuts signed by President George W. Bush in early 2008, a $787 billion bill pushed by President Obama as he took office in 2009 in the wake of the financial system’s collapse, and a tax cut and unemployment fund extension agreement reached by Mr. Obama and Congressional Republicans in December 2010.” And we’re talking about the need for more.
It’s not working. We’retrying to stimulate a caffeine junkie on their twelfth cup of coffee with a thirteenth cup. It’s no longer having the intended effect. A previous ConsumerShift post observed that the Great Recession was enabled the postmodern values shift toward less emphasis on material goods consumption. In an upcoming post, we’ll talk about people’s growing sense of “enoughness,” that is, we are seeking ways to get off the treadmill — the constant pressure to keep consuming. They are stepping back, re-prioritizing, and looking for ways to do with less.
These messages and plans for stimulus are falling on deaf ears. The ultimate challenge is how to design an economy that does not depend on debt-fueled growth to work — “consumers” are telling us that a different approach is needed. Andy Hines
Five challenges to “jobs are required”
The After Capitalism work requires challenging myths, assumptions, and beliefs that will be uncomfortable to let go of. Last week we challenged growth is required. This week we’ll look at “jobs are required” and raise some long-term challenges to it. In today’s world, yes, you need a job. But the support for this assumption is weakening and will continued to do so as we move into the future (barring collapse):
- Jobs and “going to work” are a relatively recent historical invention. Susan Lund of McKinsey reminds us that “the whole concept of a 9 to 5 job for life was a historical quirk. In 1900, 45% of people in the United States were self-employed.” Today, of course, it seems normal that full employment is the right goal and that it’s always been that way, and any suggestion of alternatives raises the boogeymen of socialism and communism.
- Accelerating technology and automation could [eventually] do the work for us. The goods new is that if we play our cards reasonably well and take advantage of the massive gains possible from accelerating technology, we are likely to have the wealth to improve standards of living.
- [Most of us] will be just fine if we don’t have jobs. The folklore of “idle hands are the devil’s workshop” is just that, folklore. Not having a job would be a shock to many people, but, folklore aside, there is no reason to believe people will not figure it out. I volunteer!
- We could choose to work less instead of consuming more. Tim Jackson’s post-growth work notes the iron cage of consumerism as a self-reinforcing loop between the continual production of novelty by firms and the continuous consumption of novelty in households. We work more so we can buy more. The postmoderns are breaking out of this cage via enoughness.
- We could choose a different wealth distribution system. Most people’s ability “make a living” and gain access to society’s wealth and resources are based upon the money earned from a job. It serves as the primary mechanism by which economy distributes wealth. So how do we get money to people if they don’t have jobs? Ideas such as welfare or social programs are stigmatized in many cultures, as are the concepts of socialism or communism – essentially they are “used futures” in a context that needs new ideas. Of course, this is at the heart of the post-capitalism research, and perhaps the toughest challenge of all.
I explore the jobs topic more thoroughly in “Getting Ready for a Post-Work Future.” – Andy Hines
Three challenges to “economic growth is required”
The After Capitalism work requires challenging myths, assumptions, and beliefs that will be uncomfortable to let go of. Alas, most readers are likely already in the camp of “we ne
ed alternatives,” so I will try to provide ammunition for you to spread the change message. At risk of sounding a bit arrogant, as is often the case in futures works, those who most need the book are the least likely to read it.
So let’s take a look at some of the key assumptions that need to be challenged in order to move to After Capitalism. The key fact – these assumptions are in fact choices, not inevitabilities. Let’s cut right to the chase and take on explore the assumption that growth is required, and suggestion some challenges to it:
- Addressing climate change will require it. From melting icebergs to wildfires to super-storms, indications of what’s to come are arriving. An “interesting” side effect of the pandemic was that it demonstrated that reduced economic activity can reduce environmental impact, in other words, it is possible, albeit we would hope it would come from a policy choices rather than a pandemic!
- Growth is running out of steam. By monetizing everything, we have made the economy” bigger than it need be or should be. Capitalism drives a near manic search for new things to monetize. The big focus now is on monetizing data (see for example, my review of Lanier’s Who Owns the Future). That’s a choice, not a necessity!
- Consuming less instead of working more. As several of our authors in the After Capitalism research have pointed out, people could choose to work less and do with less, but instead have chosen the opposite. But this may not continue. Interesting in my previous values research, I identified “enoughness,” in which the postmodern and integral values types are deliberately choosing to consumer less.
Remember, although it seems impossible, we can make different choices. — Andy Hines
Values and the Holidays: Gray Thursday and Where Do We Go from Here?
I’ve done a few media interviews on the hot topic of shopping’s imminent encroachment into the Thanksgiving holiday. I’ve been sorting likely reactions into the traditional, modern, and postmodern values types [see a summary here]. I am making some huge generalizations here, noting there will be plenty of exceptions.
As one might expect, the traditionals are most opposed to the idea of changing the tradition of the Thanksgiving holiday. They are the strongest believers in adhering to tradition – they might ask “isn’t anything sacred anymore? There are so few true holidays left.” They yearn for the days when holidays were truly observed, and not an opportunity to find a bargain. The core of the traditionals will not be shopping on Thanksgiving – though a few may quietly sneak out to pick up a few bargains.
The moderns are the key drivers behind this growing infiltration of commerce. In their quest for success, they are always on the lookout for opportunities to buy and sell. They have been pushing the Christmas season backward – if they have their way, Santa will soon be targeting Halloween. They are behind the device of shifting holiday to Mondays for the sake of more convenient three-day weekends. They see Thanksgiving day shopping as not only an opportunity for commerce, but see shopping as a means of entertainment when there isn’t that much going on anyway.
The postmoderns most likely take a position of “whatever.” They feel that if someone wants to shop – or not — it’s their business. Some may be a bit amused by all the fuss, and perhaps not averse to taking advantage of a bargain should one present itself, while others will welcome a break and a day away from it all.
What about going forward? I would not be too hasty to write off the need or desire for tradition. One of the trends that I (and many others) have been tracking is the “death of the schedule.” Our move to an on-demand, just-in-time, always-on, instant gratification world, can be disorienting. If everything is in flux, what can we count on? What are our anchor points to help us deal with a world of continuous if not relentless change? I suspect we may see attempts to create new traditions or new “stakes in the ground” to help us get a grip on the pace of our lives [see the various “slow” movements, such as Slow Foods]. One of the postmodern priorities is a sense of “enoughness,” a desire to take back control of our times and our lives. I think we will be looking for develop more constants in our lives to help us seize back control. These new traditions may be different than the old ones, and they may be customized to particular families, groups, or communities, but I suspect we will see a resurgence of traditions in the future. Andy Hines
Values shift to consuming less
A key theme of ConsumerShift is that the emergence of postmodern and integral values would lead to less emphasis on material goods consumption. It is perhaps best captured by the theme of “enoughness,” in which people feel their lives are getting out of control, and they want to take back that control and set limits. If you’re wondering what this looks like in “real life,” take a look at this New York Times piece on “Living with Less. A Lot Less.”
It tells the story of an entrepreneur who strikes it rich and finds himself being more or less sucked into a consumptive lifestyle. Interestingly, the story shows how so much of our consumption is based on an expectation that it is appropriate to where one is in their journey, e.g., strike it rich = consume as one with money and status “should” consume.
Our entrepreneur is vaguely discomforted by this slide into high consumption and it takes a romantic relationship to snap him out of it, and rethink his priorities. In ConsumerShift, it’s noted how it often takes some sort of crisis or change in life conditions to provoke a rethinking. In the case here, the author downsizes his lifestyle and turns his entrepreneurial efforts to causes such as treehugger.com. Many of you will recognize this “make a difference” turn and not he’s shift into Integral values. A really nice illustration of some of the key ideas we’ve been talking about here! Andy Hines
Values and consumption
Saw a piece “European Automakers Face Diminished Future” and checked it out to see if there might be a “values” connection. Europe in general — and Northern Europe in particular — is at the leading edge of the values shifts outlined in “ConsumerShift.” The question we might ask is whether it is just an industry slump, or is some larger change afoot? The article notes upfront that: “….it is dawning on industry executives that it could be years before sales return to the levels seen in 2007….”
The piece suggests no easy solutions – it observes some grumbling about the effects of the European debt crisis. Certainly the debt crisis is a factor, but is that it? I don’t think so. In a previous post, Changing Values and “Enoughness” Suggest Economic Stimulus Won’t Work, I suggested that US efforts to stimulate consumption were missing the trend toward consuming less. The values shifts have led enough people to shift their consumption patterns such that they won’t be “stimulated” back to the old ways. I suspect a similar shift at play in Europe, where one could argue they’ve already “been there” in terms of less “consumptive” lifestyles.
So, is at all doom and gloom then for the European automakers? No, but an adjustment is ahead. A few years back when I was with Innovaro (formerly Social Technologies), we had a day-long consortium meeting on the “Soft Path.” Our goal was, among other things, to paint a picture of a future society where consumption was less central, and to have our clients explore what it meant for their businesses – with many of them built around an assumption of continued growth in consumption. The message of the meeting is that while this future is different, and will certainly influence business models, it is not so “scary” if one prepares.
And let’s not forget that this less-consumption trend is largely an affluent-country phenomenon. The piece goes on to note, for instance, that: “Despite the dismal outlook for Europe, auto executives said they remained optimistic about the car industry globally. Sales continue to rise in countries like Brazil and Russia, offsetting Europe to some extent.” The modern values of the emerging markets are in the “growth is good” phase and their huge populations and can more than offset the decline in the affluent nations.
As is so often the case, the future is really not scary, it’s different! Andy Hines.
Seven Grand Challenges for Consumer Products Companies for the Next Decade
Had to pull together some thoughts recently on what ConsumerShift implied for consumer products companies. Here’s the outline.
- Authenticity: needs to permeate the entire culture of organizations from the executive leadership all the way down to ingredients and processes used
- Connection: especially for larger organizations, how to balance the advantages of [large] scale with the need for greater participating at the individual community level; one of the interesting potential technology enablers of this could be 3D printing for local production
- Anti-consumerism: the term consumer implies treating people as statistics or data point, which is a huge turn-off; people recognize they must consume, but don’t see that as defining who they are; want to be treated as individuals
- Self-expression: dealing with the Long Tail as the new norm — markets of one, which implies a need for providing real input for customers; breaking down the “us and them” distinction
- Enoughness – selling less stuff, but opportunities for higher-value add based on relationship building and the story or credentials of the offering, e.g., strong sustainability credentials, unique local origins, etc.
- Reconciling materialism & anti-materialism – the “anti-materialism” values are strongest in affluent countries with comparatively small and stable populations in comparison to emerging markets with materialist values and large and growing populations. Much different strategic approaches required.
- Opportunity to make a difference: attracting talent will be increasingly challenging – with top talent in high demand – and may boil down to organization who can provide the opportunity to “make a difference” having the advantage. Andy Hines
Some support for ethical consumption
My friend and colleague Christopher Kent of the Foresight Alliance pointed me to a post by the GfK Roper Consulting global trend of ‘Considered Consumption’, which shows that today a staggering 79% of consumers agree that they only “buy products and services that appeal to their beliefs, values or ideals.” ConsumerShift calls the trend “ethical consumption” (same difference). It is a central feature of the “consumershift” toward lifestyles based less on material goods consumption. My colleagues and I had been estimating somewhere around 20% of consumers willing to spend in support of their values. Roper is reporting a big jump that may reflect ideal to , a greater extent than reality, but nonetheless it still suggests a growing phenomenon.
Those interested in digging a little deeper might visit LOHAS research which suggests a $290Billion market for offerings around lifestyles of health and sustainability. They find for instance, that consumers have indeed cut their consumption (fits with enoughness driven by the Great Recession) but at the same time “there are some very bright spots within the sustainability realm, one of which is that consumers are more active in the LOHAS space than ever before.” Nice to see other sources supporting ConsumerShift’s ideas. Andy Hines