In the text edited in 1989 "Consumers Resistance to Innovations: the MArketing Problem and its Solutions", the two authors S. Ram and J. N. Seth listed five barriers that literally paralysed a potential customers when it comes to adopting an innovation. Five barriers can be clustered under two macro categories: A. Functional Barriers, those related to consumers perceived change in usage patterns (Usage, Value and Risk):
1. Usage Barriers: it comes when an innovation is not compatible whit usual existing behaviours, attitudes, habits and practice. It require a long term investments in term of time in order to an acceptance change in the customers routine. Probably the most common resistance reason.
2. Value Barriers: it occurs even if the …show more content…
Image Barriers: adoption generates identity from source of their origins like product class, industry or even manufacturing country. It clearly derives from stereotypes, but if the association is unfavourable then probably the customers will address an unfavourable image to the product.
4.3.2 Resilient Profile Segmentation
A study conducted by Shell Project & Technology division theorised fine categories of EVs resilient profiles accordingly to their innovativeness, greenness and EVs interest levels:
1. "Willing Pragmatist": with very high greenness tendency but medium innovativeness level. Typically male, older, high income, high number of retired. Driven by functionality and willing to pay a premium for fuel efficiency. They are fairly optimistic about EVs but they could fear of EVs adoption due to social image risk.
2. "Anxious Aspirer": typically female, belonging to younger generation, lower income. High greenness and innovativeness level but medium interest into adopt EVs technology. Tendency to buy second-hand, old, small and cheaper cars with low fuel consumption. Uncertainty increase anxiety and image risk. High mileage town drivers, they could be willing to pay a premium to fuel economy and environmental …show more content…
First of all relatively low numbers of EVs model available on the market don't give choice margin to potential users. Autonomy range is perceived as not sufficient and charging duration is perceived as too long; especially in case of not really developed recharging infrastructures how on average actually is. Consumers don't justify and perceive as negatively expensive total cost of ownership (purchasing price, fuel, maintenance cost and resale price) as they see EVs inferior to a conventional car, creating huge barriers to adoption, also because new generation EVs is a quite new market and it's difficult at the moment to forecast resale value and services costs. Moreover is important to highlight the fact that lack of knowledge and information cause confusion about the power cost trade-off between electricity. Concerning environment topic consumers clash mainly with two related conflicts: first one about electricity sources, second one about battery recycling (linked to short EVs battery lifespan). In the first case individuals don't know if electricity used to feed EVs engine is provided from renewable sources or carbon/nuclear sources, decreasing gasoline but increasing fossil fuel energy might be perceived as trading one problem for another. And merely, if oil price dropping down is a disincentives to EVs adopting. In the second case customers raise doubt about batteries
1. Usage Barriers: it comes when an innovation is not compatible whit usual existing behaviours, attitudes, habits and practice. It require a long term investments in term of time in order to an acceptance change in the customers routine. Probably the most common resistance reason.
2. Value Barriers: it occurs even if the …show more content…
Image Barriers: adoption generates identity from source of their origins like product class, industry or even manufacturing country. It clearly derives from stereotypes, but if the association is unfavourable then probably the customers will address an unfavourable image to the product.
4.3.2 Resilient Profile Segmentation
A study conducted by Shell Project & Technology division theorised fine categories of EVs resilient profiles accordingly to their innovativeness, greenness and EVs interest levels:
1. "Willing Pragmatist": with very high greenness tendency but medium innovativeness level. Typically male, older, high income, high number of retired. Driven by functionality and willing to pay a premium for fuel efficiency. They are fairly optimistic about EVs but they could fear of EVs adoption due to social image risk.
2. "Anxious Aspirer": typically female, belonging to younger generation, lower income. High greenness and innovativeness level but medium interest into adopt EVs technology. Tendency to buy second-hand, old, small and cheaper cars with low fuel consumption. Uncertainty increase anxiety and image risk. High mileage town drivers, they could be willing to pay a premium to fuel economy and environmental …show more content…
First of all relatively low numbers of EVs model available on the market don't give choice margin to potential users. Autonomy range is perceived as not sufficient and charging duration is perceived as too long; especially in case of not really developed recharging infrastructures how on average actually is. Consumers don't justify and perceive as negatively expensive total cost of ownership (purchasing price, fuel, maintenance cost and resale price) as they see EVs inferior to a conventional car, creating huge barriers to adoption, also because new generation EVs is a quite new market and it's difficult at the moment to forecast resale value and services costs. Moreover is important to highlight the fact that lack of knowledge and information cause confusion about the power cost trade-off between electricity. Concerning environment topic consumers clash mainly with two related conflicts: first one about electricity sources, second one about battery recycling (linked to short EVs battery lifespan). In the first case individuals don't know if electricity used to feed EVs engine is provided from renewable sources or carbon/nuclear sources, decreasing gasoline but increasing fossil fuel energy might be perceived as trading one problem for another. And merely, if oil price dropping down is a disincentives to EVs adopting. In the second case customers raise doubt about batteries