05.02.2007

"HartBeat" is The Hartman Group's FREE online newsletter, providing insight, analysis, information and strategy to give business leaders the knowledge and vision to build sustainable brands.

NOW AVAILABLE»

Baby Boomers

CHANGING FOOD CONSUMPTION AMONG BABY BOOMERS

Today, health concerns brought on by their aging bear new economic and cultural resonance that cannot be ignored by tomorrow's competitive food manufacturers. The Hartman Group takes a "deep dive" into Baby Boomers' dietary priorities, as expressed and as lived today, in order to predict their consumption habits in five years' time.

Click to learn more...

05.11.2006 Marketing to Today's Mom

04.26.2006 The Rise of Single-Serve Packaging

02.09.2006 At Home with the American Consumer

04.14.2005 Emerging Trends in Parenting the Healthy Eater

11.11.2004 What's for Dinner?: Understanding Meal Fragmentation as a Cultural Phenomenon

09.23.2004 Asian Dinner Mixes & the Family Meal: Evolving Food Culture

Print »

E-mail »

Subscribe »

Democratization of the Household

Marketing Implications of the Changing Face of Marriage

The ad begins with Mom and Dad in the front seat of the car, we see the smiling, laughing kids in the back; then a montage of scenes showing the family fun on vacation. Pretty typical feel-good car commercial fodder. But, then there's the last scene: The father, now outside of the car, removing some of the luggage. He's not, however, removing all the luggage, as he's actually being dropped off. He says, "Thanks for inviting me this weekend." And then Mom and the kids drive off. This is just one of the ads in Ford's new "Bold Moves" campaign.

Love it or hate it, Ford has tapped into the reality of the nuclear family that consumers have been living for quite some time, but marketers have been reluctant to address.

By now it's obvious: the institution of marriage is not what it once was. Indeed, there is some question as to whether we should even think of marriage as an institution any longer. In fact, if we define the term "institution" sociologically - as bundles of taken-for-granted norms guiding everyday behavior and interactions - then we have good reason to doubt the institutional character of contemporary married life. After all, on a general level, little about contemporary marriage can be easily taken for granted. Does marriage last forever or until further notice? Is marriage between a man and a woman only? How does partner "A" relate to children from partner "B's" previous marriage(s)?

Today, marriage begs so many questions and is marked by so much uncertainty that we are perhaps better served by images of "it" as an ongoing negotiation than a settled institution. Evidence of this can be seen in the broad range of structural, organizational and dynamic changes within the American family for the past 30-plus years: Marriage rates are on the decline, individuals are marrying later in life, rise in number of households consisting of single people, couples without children, single-parent families and stepfamilies, rise in divorce, and the not-so-coincidental rise in remarriage rates, and so on and so on.

In the light of recent social scientific theories of contemporary marriages and families, Hartman Group qualitative and quantitative research findings suggest that processes of negotiation have become central to marital relationships in ways generally unknown to previous generations of Americans. It's not that "anything goes" in the realm of contemporary marriage. In fact, many Americans continue to organize their marital and familial realities in accordance with traditional prescriptions for daily living. But even for these people, reliance on traditional understandings and ways of organizing marital relations tends to be a choice consciously made in the face of a variety of non-traditional options and alternatives.

So much change has occurred in the realm of adult conjugal relationships over the past half-century that many adults find it old-fashioned or simply difficult to take for granted traditional ways of orienting to married life. Not only has divorce become less stigmatized over the past 40-plus years but behaviors once deemed exclusive to marriage have become increasingly accepted as normal aspects of non-marital relationships.

Cohabitation, for example, no longer serves exclusively as a pre-marital "trial period" but has become accepted as a "permanent" social arrangement in its own right. Further, not only have non-marital childbearing and childrearing become standard practice, but increasing numbers of adults now opt to postpone having kids until later in life or intentionally decide to not have them at all (i.e., parenthood is now generally considered a personal choice one has the "right" to consciously make, which helps explain why so many couples exert painstaking effort to overcome infertility).

These and other changes make clear what we have found to be true, namely, that the marital traditions of yesteryear can no longer easily provide default ways of thinking about, and orienting to, married and family life. Put simply, the times have changed - and continue to keep on a-changing.

How this new-found autonomy translates to consumption behavior

While it is not necessarily true that one's personal world view, or the guiding principles of one's household, be reflected by the products and services that surround an individual and his or her household, at the very least we can surmise that consumers seek a balance in their lives where the everyday goals and aspirations of their private life might be embodied or "served" in part by a brand, product, store or service. If we take into consideration the evolution of the American family and the so-called institution of marriage into uniquely structured, contemporary relationships that are less reliant on tradition and now more focused on negotiating highly personalized views of "partnerships," we can begin to see how some of the hallmarks of the new democratization of marriage are reflected in everyday behavior:

Freedom from tradition-based power and control. Consumers are relying less and less on external "experts" or authority figures for information/advice/solutions and are leveraging their social networks more and more. While this notion as it relates in marriage might be seen as the transition of the unilateral power of the single bread winner ceding control to a democracy based on dual incomes, at the same time the overall consumer desire to move away from tradition-based power and control has been highly evident in the area of medical self-diagnosis and treatment. This is true at the individual, partner and family level. Currently, the behavioral "why's" behind the growth in consumer self-diagnosis and treatment both of the person and of the family overall are diverse, yet connected by a common theme that finds Americans seeking to take control over some element of their healthcare. One notable example lies in the case of consumers with chronic health conditions, many of whom eventually end up turning to alternative medicine - specifically to dietary supplement pills - as opposed to prescription drugs alone. In doing so, consumers view dietary supplements as a key symbolic component that they use in their lives to challenge the hold ("power") they view pharmaceutical companies, and even traditional doctors, have over themselves, their partners and their families.

Freedom of choice in the face of traditional ways of living and thinking. The interplay of the broadened definition of the family juxtaposed on the behavioral details of how families negotiate their day-to-day existence in the context of "freedom of choice" can be well illustrated by the phenomenon of meal fragmentation and the increasingly prevalent practice of catering to children as picky eaters within families. While the traditions of mealtimes where families would formerly gather to process the events of a day have evolved into a series of unique food occasions that exemplify "freedom of choice" (for dinner, sister eats popcorn and Diet Sprite while brother likes canned stew, and mom and dad are late getting back from work), we can say that traditional living in terms of the days of June Cleaver are largely gone, and choice now controls meal occasions. How these food practices are negotiated between the heads of household, and the children that may or may not live there, are great examples of how choice in the democratic family influences day-to-day life.

Open communication and personal transparency. Just as we mentioned earlier that the individual and household world views of consumers might not necessarily have to be reflected in the products, stores and services they utilize, it's true that there is a natural inclination within consumers to seek such a balance. As a consequence, the tentative, yet emerging practice of manufacturers, retailers, and service providers to "open the books" or at least communicate openly to customers the cause and effect of their operations closely parallels the somewhat egalitarian forums that democratic families practice: With a greater focus on negotiating personal transparency and communication within family structures, it is almost inevitable that consumers will increasingly seek the same sorts of qualities from the goods and services they receive.

Head(s) of Household. Given the diverse make-up of families, the concept of "Head of Household" (HOH) should be considered dangerously outmoded. The plural "Heads of Household" would be more accurate to reflect the fact that the spirit of decision making is now egalitarian in nature. Even in those households where decision making tends to fall on the lap of one or another spouses, the primary decision maker will still find him or herself accountable to the ideal of equality in the marriage. In this sense, even when marketers have good reason to believe they know, say, a women is a primary decision maker in a certain area of family life, they would be wise to craft communications that situate her decision making in a context of democratic values, as this will not only acknowledge her accountability to her mate, but it will align with the beliefs she holds dear about the way marriage should operate. Further, it should be acknowledged that change is endemic to marriages and families. For instance, the female partner may be the HOH regarding all things financial and her male partner may be the HOH regarding health care. Furthermore, these partners may switch HOH positions when children are added to the family or upon retirement. Again, images and messaging should be flexible to address multiple HOHs and changing HOH designations.

As the incumbent of HOH is variably determined, what that role means is also up for negotiation. It is not prudent to assume that HOH implies sole decision-making power within a given domain. It is increasingly difficult to assume knowledge about how household decisions are made. What works today for a couple might not work tomorrow, as couples are endlessly updating their modus operandi. Flexibility is the key to resonating with today's couple. If you speak to consumers as peers who is equally malleable in transacting with them, you will appear empathetic with consumers' continually evolving decision making. Also, acknowledging consumers' need for contingency planning by providing them with multiple answers for each need will help them create customized solutions that reflect their "unique" and special needs.

Conclusion

Perhaps the key implication of our argument that marriages and families are increasingly negotiated arrangements that center on democratic principles, is that companies should engage their consumers much like marital partners are now engaging one another.

• Treat consumers as equal partners

• Recognize and respect the freedom of choice consumers are now forced to live with

• Understand that consumers are orienting to all of their relationships as means to acquire a stable sense of self-identity

• Be as transparent as possible

• Remain open to the messages consumers are sending and respect their points of view

• Show that you are working hard at making the relationship satisfying and lasting

• Recognize that the relationship is essentially voluntary and that the consumer has other compelling options