The January sales: when collaboration goes out of the window

A few weeks ago I posted a piece about why groups never seem to win the talent show 'The X Factor' and concluded that individualism is very much alive and living when it comes to aspiration and ambition.  Seeing images on the news of shoppers at the post-Christmas sales this week leads me to the conclusion that the same seems to apply when it comes to ownership and control. 

We're constantly being told how wonderful it is that we live in a world where collaboration is king - where we share our thoughts and creativity freely and where we can create more collectively than as individuals. This is not in evidence, however, when it comes to possession.  The need to buy more, for less, than everyone else seems to override all sense of moral decency when it comes to the January sales.  Elbows are sharpened, routes planned and queues jumped with military precision just to get a chance to buy products we might otherwise not have looked at.  

Have you ever noticed when shopping that if you stop and stare intently at a particular product - maybe pick it up and look at it, then put it back down - it becomes irresistible to other shoppers.  They have to take a look - they need to know what you've seen that they may have missed.  Try it one day in a busy shop- find a product that is completely useless and pay it a lot of attention - you'll soon attract other shoppers.  We seem to want what others want.

So what drives this - and does it apply to us all or are there particular personality types that are more likely to treat shopping as a competitive sport?  Well, I expect if you headed to one of the big department stores on boxing day you'd find a particularly determined sort of shopper there  - and they're a fairly ruthless bunch - maybe even 'professionals' who are buying to re-sell on e-bay.   I avoid the sales like the plague (although online shopping has given me another option) - but then, I've always hated competitive sports.

Maybe this is a Darwinian thing - animal behaviour programmed into us that only comes out when in competitive crowd situations (football matches are another good example) - survival of the fittest.  It certainly seems to bring out aspects of human nature that are unpalatable in other situations. And yet maybe there is a correlation between success in shopping (hunting and gathering) and successful survival (there's a research project there) - although I have to say I remain unconvinced that even a cashmere sweater with a 70% discount is going to secure a place in the evolutionary story...

Christmas may be cancelled - but the January sales are definitely on...

The run-up to Christmas 2010 started fairly predictably - M&S launched their all-singing, all-dancing celeb packed Christmas ad (I particularly liked Jamie Redknapp's unconvincing turn as a DJ), closely followed by a moody number from John Lewis (which, in attempting to tug at our heart strings, instead caused a furore amongst animal rights groups).  We all had a moan about Christmas starting earlier and earlier, but I'm guessing that some of us are wishing we had begun our shopping a little earlier, because then the freeze came...

It has been a perfect storm - austerity measures, freezing weather, protesting students, rising fuel costs and rubbish on the streets - we could be back in the winter of discontent...and it's not over yet; on January 4th VAT will rise to 20%  adding to the squeeze.  So, have we all cancelled Christmas and gone back to a simpler time when it was about stuffing a satsuma and a sugar mouse in a stocking and hanging it at the end of the kids' beds?  Nope - we've gone online.

UK shoppers spent 6.4 Billion online in November  when the big chill started (more than 20% up on last year) (Source: IMRG Cap Gemini) - and December figures are expected to be  equally high.  Great for online retailers?  Well yes, but only if the deliveries can get through in time for Christmas. If goods don't make it in time it could mean a lot of returns for companies in the New Year, giving them an unrealistic picture of their Q4 sales.  TV news items showing major out of town shopping centres that are virtually empty on what should be their busiest days of the year suggest that there will either be a massive last minute surge or that people are going elsewhere.  It could also be a great time for small, local independent retailers that people can reach easily on foot. 

Whatever happens, it's likely that major retailers will have a lot of stock to shift in January, so shoppers can expect excellent discounts, despite the VAT rise.  It all hinges on a good January for many retailers - but inevitably there will be casualties...  On that happy note, I'll sign off  - happy shopping - I hope you have a lovely Christmas, with or without the presents...

Individualism still rules - why groups don't win the X-factor

The X-factor Finalists 2010 - who do you relate to?

Some of the big thinkers of the modern tech world, Tapscott, Leadbetter, Shirky, tell us again and again that collaboration is the new black and that our social and cultural norms are shifting towards an online space where the 'mash-up' rules.  This is a place where everyone contributes (and has a right to contribute) - where nothing belongs to individuals, where creativity is about re-hashing, building on, shaping the work of others into something new.  A wiki world where nothing is static, nothing is fixed.

To an extent I agree - we are living in a time where the sands are shifting, but this comes at a cost.  Creating something real and valuable is losing its worth, and value is increasingly elusive, particularly online. I also believe the idea that we are all fully signed up to this happy collaborative, this divestment from ownership and control, this free-for-all, is to ignore some of the fundamental aspects of human nature.  Yes, society depends on the social - on groups of people working together to create stable environments in which we can live - but we are also individuals, and when a situation is created where individuals' ability to succeed (or their perception of it) is compromised by participation in a group, there is likely to be a negative reaction.

We are still attuned to seek personal success - our aspirations may be partially for our families, our friends, etc. but they can always be traced back to our individual goals and objectives for ourselves, the things that make us feel worthwhile - a search for personal meaning in life.

So, what does all this have to do with the X-Factor?  Well, when we are presented with a choice between five people with different stories and experiences who clearly have each other to rely on, who have a close bond (e.g. 3rd placed boy-band One Direction), it is more difficult for us to project our own personal goals and ambitions on them.  However, an individual with a unique personal talent (Rebecca Ferguson or winner Matt Cardle) is much easier for us to relate to.  The success available to them as a single human being is more tangible to us, and feeds our need for personal success.  So, we are attracted to those individuals who symbolise opportunity or personal success for us.  A vote for them is a vote for ourselves.

I am, of course, speculating wildly here - I have no evidence on which to base the above - but my personal opinion is that in a world where we are creating new, and multiple identities for ourselves both on- and off-line, and where the lines between reality and fantasy, ownership and openness, control and freedom are increasingly blurred, we will continue to seek to elevate those who represent a world where opportunities are available to the individual, and where unique talents are rewarded - and until we see collaboration as a route to individual success, the groups won't get a look in.