IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/8984.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Today’s Consumers Perceive Tomorrow’s Smart Products

Author

Listed:
  • Rijsdijk, S.A.
  • Hultink, E.J.

Abstract

This manuscript investigates consumer responses to new smart products. Due to the application of information technology, smart products are able to collect, process and produce information, and can be described to ‘think’ for themselves. In this study, consumers respond to smart products that are characterized by two different combinations of smartness dimensions. One group of products shows the smartness dimensions of autonomy, adaptability and reactivity. Another group of smart products are multifunctional and can cooperate with other products. We measure consumer responses to these smart products in terms of the innovation attributes of relative advantage, compatibility, observability, complexity and perceived risk. A study among 184 consumers shows that products with higher levels of smartness are perceived to have both advantages and disadvantages. Higher levels of product smartness are mainly associated with higher levels of observability and perceived risk. The effects of product smartness on relative advantage, compatibility and complexity vary across product smartness dimensions and across product categories. For example, higher levels of product autonomy are perceived as increasingly advantageous while a high level of multifunctionality is perceived disadvantageous. The paper discusses the advantages and pitfalls for each of the five product smartness dimensions and their implications for new product development (NPD). The manuscript concludes with a discussion of the limitations of the study and it provides suggestions for further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Rijsdijk, S.A. & Hultink, E.J., 2007. "How Today’s Consumers Perceive Tomorrow’s Smart Products," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-005-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:8984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/8984/ERS-2007-005-ORG.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Folkes, Valerie S, 1988. "The Availability Heuristic and Perceived Risk," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(1), pages 13-23, June.
    2. Dhebar, Anirudh, 1996. "Information technology and product policy: 'Smart' products," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 477-485, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rebecca Page & Lisa Dilling, 2020. "How experiences of climate extremes motivate adaptation among water managers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 499-516, August.
    2. Erevelles, Sunil & Roy, Abhik & Yip, Leslie S. C., 2001. "The universality of the signal theory for products and services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 175-187, May.
    3. Sefa Hayibor & David Wasieleski, 2009. "Effects of the Use of the Availability Heuristic on Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 151-165, January.
    4. Theoharakis, Vasilis & Vakratsas, Demetrios & Wong, Veronica, 2007. "Market-level information and the diffusion of competing technologies: An exploratory analysis of the LAN industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 742-757, June.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:389-395 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Xue-Jing Liu & Gustavo S. Mesch, 2020. "The Adoption of Preventive Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic in China and Israel," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Keongtae Kim & Jooyoung Park & Yang Pan & Kunpeng Zhang & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang, 2022. "Risk Disclosure in Crowdfunding," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 1023-1041, September.
    8. Bigoni, Maria & Le Coq, Chloé & Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2008. "Risk Aversion, Prospect Theory, and Strategic Risk in Law Enforcement: Evidence From an Antitrust Experiment," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 696, Stockholm School of Economics.
    9. Chaudhuri, Arjun, 1997. "Consumption Emotion and Perceived Risk: A Macro-Analytic Approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 81-92, June.
    10. Andrea Stevenson Thorpe & Stephen Roper, 2019. "The Ethics of Gamification in a Marketing Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 597-609, March.
    11. Dhebar, Anirudh, 2023. "Preinstalled functionality as a service," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 66(5), pages 643-653.
    12. Arnold, Mark J. & Reynolds, Kristy E. & Ponder, Nicole & Lueg, Jason E., 2005. "Customer delight in a retail context: investigating delightful and terrible shopping experiences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(8), pages 1132-1145, August.
    13. Nahid Unkic & Jasmina Okicic, 2021. "The Relationship between Decision-Making Heuristics and Perceived Quality of Life," Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, Eurasian Publications, vol. 9(2), pages 90-99.
    14. Cristian Rogério Foguesatto & Felipe Dalzotto Artuzo & Edson Talamini & João Armando Dessimon Machado, 2020. "Understanding the divergences between farmer’s perception and meteorological records regarding climate change: a review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-16, January.
    15. Samson, Alain & Voyer, Benjamin G., 2014. "Emergency purchasing situations: Implications for consumer decision-making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 21-33.
    16. Ka-Shing Cheung & Chung-Yim Yiu & Yihan Guan, 2022. "Homebuyer Purchase Decisions: Are They Anchoring to Appraisal Values or Market Prices?," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, March.
    17. Peter, Raja & Ramaseshan, B & Nayar, C.V, 2002. "Conceptual model for marketing solar based technology to developing countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 511-524.
    18. Uzma Khan & Alexander DePaoli, 2024. "Brand loyalty in the face of stockouts," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 44-74, January.
    19. Bischof, Jannis & Wüstemann, Jens, 2007. "How does fair value measurement under IAS 39 affect disclosure choices of European banks?," Papers 07-75, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    20. Scott Radnitz, 2022. "Perceived threats and the trade-off between security and human rights," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 367-381, May.
    21. Esbjerg, Lars & Jensen, Birger Boutrup & Bech-Larsen, Tino & de Barcellos, Marcia Dutra & Boztug, Yasemin & Grunert, Klaus G., 2012. "An integrative conceptual framework for analyzing customer satisfaction with shopping trip experiences in grocery retailing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 445-456.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Adoption; Consumer Evaluations; Intelligent Products; New Product Development; Smart Products;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M11 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Production Management
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:8984. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.