Perceived Function: An Investigation into a Product Advantage between Aesthetics and Function

Satoru Goto, Yuuki Shigemoto, Shuichi Ishida

Abstract


This study involved an empirical comparison of product competitiveness driven by aesthetic and technological innovations in a mature market. This study began with a theoretical idea that users may perceive and evaluate technology development through the visible form of a product. Statistical analyses of user reviews of digital cameras showed that the impact of technology development on competitiveness was greater than that of aesthetic changes. The results demonstrated that users did not leverage product appearance for the recognition of technology development. Moreover, the findings show that specification information had a greater influence on product advantage when users did not visually perceive technological improvement. These results may indicate that manufacturers have not yet fully exploited product design for maximising product advantage in the mature market.

Keywords


Function, Aesthetics, Perceived function, Utilitarian and hedonic value

Full Text:

PDF

References


Benner, M. J., & Tripsas, M. (2012). The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras. Strategic Management Journal, 33(3), 277-302. doi: 10.1002/smj.950

Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 16-29. doi: 10.2307/1252116

Bornemann, T., Schöler, L., & Homburg, C. (2015). In the eye of the beholder? The effect of product appearance on shareholder value. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 704-715. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12228

Boztepe, S. (2007). User value: competing theories and models. International Journal of Design, 1(2), 55-63.

Buganza, T., Dell’Era, C., Pellizzoni, E., Trabucchi, D., & Verganti, R. (2015). Unveiling the potentialities provided by new technologies: A process to pursue technology epiphanies in the smartphone app industry. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(3), 391–414. doi: 10.1111/caim.12141

Candi, M. (2006). Design as an element of innovation: evaluating design emphasis in technology-based firms. International Journal of Innovation Management, 10(4), 351-374. doi: 10.1142/S1363919606001533

Candi, M., & Saemundsson, R. J. (2011). Exploring the relationship between aesthetic design as an element of new service development and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management 28(4): 536-557. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00827.x

Chang, T. -Z., & Wildt, A. R. (1994). Price, product information, and purchase intention: an empirical study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 16-27. doi: 10.1177/00920703942

Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: the role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48-63. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.72.3.48

Creusen, M. E. H. (2011). Research opportunities related to consumer response to product design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 405-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00812.x

Creusen, M. E. H., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2005). The different roles of product appearance in consumer choice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 63-81. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00103.x

Crilly, N., Maier, A., & Clarkson, P. J. (2008). Representing artefacts as media: modelling the relationship between designer intent and consumer experience. International Journal of Design, 2(3), 15-27.

Crilly, N., Good, D., Matravers, D., & Clarkson, P. J. (2008). Design as communication: exploring the validity and utility of relating intention to interpretation. Design Studies, 29(5), 425-457. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2008.05.002

Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., & Clarkson, P. J. (2004). Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25(6), 547-577. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2004.03.001

Dell’Era, C., & Verganti, R. (2011). Diffusion processes of product meanings in design-intensive industries: determinants and dynamics. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(6), 881-895. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00849.x

Eisenman, M. (2013). Understanding aesthetic innovation in the context of technological evolution. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 332-351. doi: 10.5465/amr.2011.0262

Elliott, R. (1997). Existential consumption and irrational desire. European Journal of Marketing, 31(3), 285-296. doi: 10.1108/03090569710162371

Fehder, D. C., Nelling, E., & Trester, J. J. (2009). Innovation and price: the case of digital cameras. Applied Economics, 41(17), 2229-2236. doi: 10/1080/00036840701222488

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi: 10.2307/3151312

Gemser, G., & Leenders, M. A. A. M. (2001). How integrating industrial design in the product development process impacts on company performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(1), 28-38. doi: 10.1111/1540-5885.1810028

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2015.1005806

Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414-433. doi: 10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6

Hanzaee, K. H., & Baghi, M. (2011). Evaluating the dimensions of the role of product design (hedonic and utilitarian) in consumer’s post-consumption emotions and purchase intention. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 8(3), 637-647.

Hertenstein, J. H., Platt, M. B., & Veryzer, R. W. (2005). The impact of industrial design effectiveness on corporate financial performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 3-21. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6872.2005.00100.x

Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46, 92-101. doi: 10.2307/1251707

Hoegg, J., & Alba, J. W. (2011). Seeing is Believing (too much): the influence of product form on perceptions of functional performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 346-359. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00802.x

Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008). Thinking about technology: applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Research Policy, 37(5), 790-805. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002

Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Sundie, J. M., Li, N. P., Li, Y. J., & Neuberg, S. L. (2009). Deep rationality: the evolutionary economics of decision Making. Social Cognition, 27(5), 764-785. doi: 10.1521/soco.2009.27.5.764

Kreuzbauer, R., & Malter, A. J. (2005). Embodied cognition and new product design: changing product form to influence brand categorization. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(2), 165–176. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00112.x

Lichtenstein, D. R., & Burton, S. (1989). The relationship between perceived and objective price-quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(4), 429-443. doi: 10.2307/3172763

Moon, H., Park, J., & Kim, S. (2015). The importance of an innovative product design on customer behavior: development and validation of a scale. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(2), 224-232. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12172

Mugge, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2013). Seeking the ideal level of design newness: consumer response to radical and incremental product design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(S1), 34–47. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12062

Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

Oude Ophuis, P. A. M., & Van Trijp, H. C. M. (1995). Perceived quality: A market driven and consumer oriented approach. Food Quality and Preference, 6(3), 177-183. doi: 10.1016/0950-3293(94)00028-T

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544. doi: 10.1177/014920638601200408

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

Rampino, L. (2011). The innovation pyramid: A categorization of the innovation phenomenon in the product-design field. International Journal of Design, 5(1), 3-16.

Ravasi, D., & Stigliani, I. (2012). Product design: a review and research agenda for management studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), 464–488. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2021.00330.x

Rubera, G., & Droge, C. (2013). Technology versus design innovation’s effects on sales and Tobin’s Q: the moderating role of branding strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(3), 448-464. doi:10.1111/jpim.12012

Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & B. L. Gross. (1991). Why we buy what we

buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170. doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90050-8

Shetty, Y. K. (1987). Product quality and competitive strategy. Business Horizons, 30(3), 46–52. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(87)90036-X

Steenkamp, J. E. M. (1990). Conceptual model of the quality perception process. Journal of Business Research, 21(4), 309–333. doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(90)90019-A

Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203–220. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00041-0

Talke, K., Salomo, S., Wieringa, J. E., & Lutz, A. (2009). What about design newness? Investigating the relevance of a neglected dimension of product innovativeness. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(6), 601–615. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00686.x

Thompson, D. V., Hamilton, R. W., & Rust, R. T. (2005). Feature fatigue: when product capabilities become too much of a good thing. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(4), 431–442. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431

Toivonen, R. M. (2012). Product quality and value from consumer perspective-an application to wooden products. Journal of Forest Economics, 18(2), 157–173. doi: j.jfe.2011.12.004

Turel, O., Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2010). User acceptance of hedonic digital artifacts: A theory of consumption values perspective. Information and Management, 47(1), 53–59. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2009.10.002

Veryzer, R. W. (2005). The roles of marketing and industrial design in discontinuous new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 22-41. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6872.2005.00101.x

Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310-320. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238

Walsh, V., Roy, R., Bruce, M., & Potter, S. (1992). Winning by design: technology, product design and international competitiveness. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishing Business. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.1994.tb00861.x

Wong, K. K. (2016). Mediation analysis, categorical moderation analysis, and higher-order constructs modeling in partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A B2B example using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 26, 1-22. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1643.0562




DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242019000200033

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Technology Management & Innovation

2019 © Universidad Alberto Hurtado - Facultad de Economía y Negocios. 
Erasmo Escala 1835 - Santiago, Chile.
Economic Analysis Review | Observatorio Económico | Gestión y Tendencias 

Journal Supported by