When, for whom and why expanding single-option offerings creates value: locomotion fit from choice between options

Abstract

Purpose Emerging direct-to-consumer brands offer a single option to consumers before expanding their assortment as the business grows. This provides a counterexample to commonly held beliefs concerning consumers’ aversion to single options. The purpose of this paper is to study when, for whom and why offering two product options (vs a single option) is valued by consumers. Design/methodology/approach Across six experiments, this research investigates consumers’ locomotion orientation (a motivation for controlling progress), which affects the valuation of choice (vs single options). Findings Consumers’ locomotion orientation determines perceived product value for products chosen from a two-option set (vs when considering a single option) because choice offers active control, which is engaging for high-locomotion consumers. Expanding the set to six options has no such effect. Research limitations/implications Studies 1, 4a and 4b are set in the context of expert-selected single options, while Studies 2, 3 and 5 do not involve expert selection. However, the authors does not contrast expert vs non-expert conditions directly. Practical implications Managers can increase consumers’ willingness to pay by using advertisements to induce locomotion or segmenting consumers based on locomotion orientations. Originality/value Research suggests that consumers value choice between options, yet many emerging brands succeed with a single option. The authors reconcile this by providing insights into motivations that determine when, for whom and why choice (vs a single option) is valued.