Consumerism

Consumption and the Net Generation becomes quite an odd topic because according to Tapscott, we’re more distanced from the traditional modes of product advertisement (unsubstantiated claims of quality, repetition, product placement, etc), but there seem to be more avenues that create deeper connections with Net Geners. No longer is someone just limited to putting the message out there as often as possible and hoping people listen to it, but now advertisers can actually engage at a much closer level with individual consumers and it is those companies who tend to build credibility with the Net Generation.

I think this is true and I can relate this to an experience I recently had. It’s odd because it simultaneously bolsters and contradicts some of the shopping norms Tapscott notes. It runs a bit contradictory to the Integrity norm because I personally experienced how HEAVILY companies moderate their reviews. Although Tapscott argues that no amount of spin can sway the net generation, if the company controls the pipeline, they can make things appear however they want, so their spin works by default within that context. However, Tapscott discusses this issue outside of the company’s space, but when shopping user reviews on shopping sites , whether owned by the manufacturer or not, are considered to be fair and accurate. This could also play into Tapscott’s norm because the company realizes the power of user commentary on their products. At any rate, I purchased a hoodie over a year ago and put it in the closet within a month or so because the seams started to inexplicably come apart and pocket separated from the inside of the hoodie which effectively created a hole in the pocket. Anyway, I recently came across the hoodie again and since I never contacted customer service, I figured that I would at least let people know about the quality issues I encountered. Within hours of posting my negative review, I received an e-mail informing me that my review had been reviewed and was not posted because the company would like to see what they could do to “make things right.” After a series of e-mails, I received a brand new hoodie in the mail just because the company didn’t want the five star rating on their product to take a hit.  This also plays into Tapscott’s speed norm.

And this leads to the Collaboration norm. Although I knew and still know that their main aim was to keep their rating/reputation for the product high (in order to maintain the norms of integrity and scrutiny), they reached out to me and asked for additional feedback so they could make sure to change their processes/design in an effort to make sure this has been resolved or doesn’t continue to happen. Again, I know that this is more or less a move to placate me so I don’t run down their product elsewhere, just like with traditional customer service; however, they positioned their inquiries using this norm in order to engage me and make it feel like I was part of their quality improvement process and was actually making things better. This not only got me to send more feedback than I would have otherwise, but I also felt more inclined to let them make things right rather than just writing them off

.

So, this greatly changes the accountability companies have to individual consumers and vice versa. Consumers are willing to  completely write off companies if they’re willing to write off an individual consumer or issue. However, companies currently and will increasingly work with instead of in opposition to customers in order to ensure they can gain more access than their competitors. Thanks to the easy access to other purchasing options and alternate sources of opinions about product XYZ, the entire consumer-producer relationship is more evenly balanced than ever before.