The Research Problem and Objectives

Marketers believe that coolness in a brand is an effective way of selling a brand but little research is done on coolness in a brand; hence little is known about what actually leads to coolness. The consumers value brands that are perceived cool in the market place. A cool image is very important for example Apple is considered the “best global brand” because of coolness associated with the brand. Coolness is important, because it adds value by exciting consumers and also adds symbolism. According to Kerner and Pressman (2007) everyone as consumers in society prefer “coolness” even if they are unable to define coolness. Hence coolness is preferred by consumers and marketers. The research problem is that although coolness is important for consumers and marketers, it is not defined. The aim of the research article is to define coolness that creates unique image of the brand. The research article further aims to identify the quality that makes product cool and it aims to validate the findings empirically.

Overview of Theories and Hypotheses

There is no specific definition of coolness that researchers agree on, however according to Dar-Nimrod et al. (2012) there are four properties of coolness. Firstly “coolness” is constructed by the society hence it is not inherent feature of any product. Rather coolness is a perception that society associates with the product. Hence in this way “coolness” is constructed socially just like status in the society. Hence a product will be cool only if people consider it cool. Then things that are considered cool are changed overtime with the passage of time. Although degree of subjectivity is high but consumers are able to recognize coolness instantaneously (Belk et al. 2010). Then coolness further ranges on a continuum and hence consumers from same background are able to agree on similar things and regard similar things as cool. In this way coolness can be measured by “consensual assessment technique” where group of consumers can be asked about coolness from the same background because they will perceive similar things cool. This technique was actually designed to measure creativity which is subjective like coolness. In the same way coolness is regarded as a positive quality because there are few quantitative studies that  confirm that “cool people tend to possess personality traits considered desirable by the audience evaluating coolness” (Dar-Nimrod et al. 2012). It is considered a positive effect because it is generally used as a synonym for something that consumers like. Lastly in addition some extra value should be given to consumers, as mere coolness is not enough. If consumers associated positively with the brand they should get some extra value that is not present in the product which is not considered cool.

The article further distinguished “coolness” from “good”.  On one hand some researchers argue that the people or brands become cool by “mimicking” the behavior of other cool people in the society or in the same way by conforming to norms and standards of the society. On the other hand rebellious attitude and individualism also makes brand cool in the society.  It is interesting to show that common theme is present and all factors are related to autonomy. Autonomy is basically “willingness to pursue one’s own course irrespective of the norms, beliefs, and expectations of others”. The article showed that the willingness of going against the norm defines norms. This willingness defined as autonomy is internal motivator and hence cannot be observed directly. Many examples were mentioned in the article for example Harley Davidson gained an autonomous image by associating with “outlaw” biker gangs famous for rebelling against rules and conventions associated with middle-class.

The literature depict that going against the norms is at times disliked by the society. Since norms are developed to help coordinate interactions among people with different personal interests, and they serve as standards for appropriate behavior to which people are motivated and expected to conform hence norm violations are often punished.  From this perspective, it seems curious that autonomy based on diverging from the norm might make something seem cooler. However, although divergent behaviors are often perceived to be inefficient, harmful, or otherwise inappropriate, there are some cases in which expressing autonomy leads to more favorable impressions.

 

Overview of Studies and Findings

The six experiments were conducted to demonstrate what coolness is. An experimental approach was used to examine the empirical relationship between consumer’s inferences of autonomy and perceived coolness. According to the findings of the research the consumers associate coolness with products that go against the norm and show autonomy. Hence more the product express autonomy more cool it is considered. Now autonomy is seemed to be appropriate, and it also increases the perceptions of coolness in consumer mind. It is the state when behavior diverges from the norm which is considered “unnecessary or illegitimate, when the autonomy is bounded and when the consumer views social norms as being overly repressive”. The experiment finally concluded that there is a connection between autonomy and coolness. It shows that coolness is distinct from liking by showing that whether a consumer has a goal to express autonomy moderates preference for cool brands.

In the six experiments conducted it was demonstrate that consumers perceive cultural objects, including brands and people, to be cool when they infer that the object is autonomous in an appropriate way. Hence when a brand goes against the norms in appropriate way then they are considered cool. Consumers think that a brand is autonomous when it goes against the norms.  Autonomy seems appropriate, and thus leads to perceptions of coolness, when a divergent behavior is perceived to be at least as effective or valuable as the normative behavior, it diverges from a norm that is not considered legitimate, and divergence is bounded rather than extreme. Moreover, consumers with countercultural values, who are more critical of societal institutions and more likely to consider norm divergence appropriate than those without countercultural values, tend to perceive a relatively higher level of autonomy cool. It was further depicted that although cool brands are typically desired, coolness and desirability are not the same thing, as consumers prefer cool brands only when they want to stand out rather than fit in.

According to the six studies conducted, it was confirmed that the cool products diverge from the norms. This experiment showed that a product whose design was differentiated from the norm seemed cooler than an equally liked product whose design conformed to the norm. Moreover, the effect of diverging from the norm on perceived coolness occurred because participants inferred that the brand was autonomous in an appropriate way. However, the data also tentatively suggest that consumers do not always perceive autonomous behavior as cool, as the perception that the product diverged from the norm in a bad way was negatively related to perceived coolness.

Legitimacy is an important factor in explaining coolness, the effect of diverging from a norm on perceived coolness depends on norm legitimacy. Participants perceived a brand to be cooler when it diverged from an illegitimate norm but less cool when it diverged from a legitimate norm. Although both acts of divergence increased perceptions of autonomy, diverging from an illegitimate norm seemed appropriate, whereas diverging from a legitimate norm did not.

The article further showed that bounded autonomy is better than extreme autonomy. The data revealed a curvilinear relationship between autonomy and perceived coolness: bands were considered cooler when they showed bounded autonomy rather than a low or extremely high level. Additionally, song choice showed a similar curvilinear pattern that was mediated by perceived coolness, indicating that coolness can influence consumer choice. The study provided additional evidence that autonomy increases perceptions of coolness when the deviation seems appropriate, in this case because autonomy was bounded rather than too extreme. However, the study did not address how this boundary differs across consumers.

The article further mentioned that the study 5 showed that consumers prefer cool brands only when they want to express an autonomous identity. In contexts that encourage autonomy expression, consumers preferred a cool brand more than an uncool brand and as much as a classy brand. Conversely, in contexts that encourage conformity, consumers did not prefer a cool brand to an uncool brand and preferred a classy brand to both.

Thus, cool is not merely another way of saying something is desirable or liked. Although brands seen as cool are often preferred to brands seen as uncool, consumers are less likely.

 

Theoretical Contribution

The article examined the link between coolness and autonomy. Understanding what makes things cool has confused academics and marketers alike. This article examined the relationship between autonomy and perceived coolness, finding that brands and people that diverge from the norm in a way that seems appropriate are perceived to be cool. Study 1 illustrates that consumers perceive a product whose design diverges from the norm to be cooler than a product whose design conforms to the norm both for a familiar, real brand and for an unknown, fictitious brand. Studies 2, 3, 4a, and 4b illustrate that autonomous behavior only increases perceptions of coolness when the autonomy seems appropriate. Whether expressing autonomy seems appropriate, and thus cool or uncool, depends on the norm from which an object diverges. Study 2 shows that diverging from an illegitimate norm increases perceived coolness, but diverging from a legitimate norm has the opposite effect. Whether autonomy seems appropriate also depends on the extent to which an object diverges. Our studies reveal a curvilinear effect of autonomy on perceptions of coolness such that rock bands (study 3), fashion brands (study 4a), and people (study 4b) expressing moderate, “bounded” autonomy are considered cooler than both those expressing low autonomy and those expressing very high levels of autonomy. Further, the level of autonomy considered the coolest depends on the consumers evaluating the object. Studies 4a and 4b illustrate that countercultural consumers, who are critical of mainstream social institutions and thus more likely to consider autonomous behavior appropriate, perceive higher levels of autonomy to be cool compared to less countercultural consumers. Finally, study 5 affirms that cool is not merely another way of saying something is “good.” Although cool brands are often preferred to uncool brands, this is moderated by a consumer’s goal to signal autonomy versus to fit in. Collectively, the studies empirically support a conceptualization of coolness as a subjective, socially constructed positive trait attributed to cultural objects (e.g., people, brands, products, trends) perceived to be appropriately autonomous.

 

Recommendations

It is recommended that marketers should incorporate the findings of the article in their brands. It was confirmed that the cool products diverge from the norms. This experiment showed that a product whose design was differentiated from the norm seemed cooler than an equally liked product whose design conformed to the norm. Hence brands that want to be perceived cool should diverge from the norms. The article further showed that bounded autonomy is better than extreme autonomy hence marketers should ensure bounded autonomy.  It was depicted that consumers prefer cool brands only when they want to express an autonomous identity hence it is important to ensure that coolness and divergence is linked with the product category.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Aggarwal, Pankaj, and Ann L. McGill (2007), “Is That Car Smiling at Me? Schema Congruity as a Basis for Evaluating Anthropomorphized Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (December), 468–79.

 

Allison, Anne (2009), “The Cool Brand, Affective Activism and Japanese Youth,” Theory, Culture and Society, 26 (March),

89–111.

 

Belk, Russell W., Kelly Tian, and Heli Paavola (2010), “Consuming Cool: Behind the Unemotional Mask,” in Research in

Consumers Behavior, Vol .12, ed. Russel W. Belk, Bingley: Emerald, 183–208.

 

Bellezza, Silvia, Francesca Gino, and Anat Keinan (2014), “The Red Sneakers Effect: Inferring Status and Competence from Signals of Nonconformity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (June), 35–54.

 

Berger, Jonah (2008), “Identity Signaling, Social Influence, and Social Contagion,” in Peer Influence Processes among Youth, ed. M. J. Prinstein and K. A. Dodge, New York: Guilford.

 

Dar-Nimrod, Ilan, I. G. Hansen, T. Proulx, and D. R. Lehman (2012), “Coolness: An Empirical Investigation,” Journal of Individual Differences, 33 (3), 175–85.