Page 130 - Harvard Business Review, Sep/Oct 2018

IDEA WATCH

DEFEND YOUR RESEARCH

An international research team led by Tobias Otterbring,

now at Aarhus University, tracked purchases people
made at a home-furnishings store in a midsize Swedish

city during one weekend. When a tall, athletic-looking

male employee stood at the entrance, male shoppers

spent significantly more money than usual and more,
on average, than female shoppers did. The conclusion:

Men Buy More from Manly Men

Professor Otterbring, defend your research

MEN SPENT TWICE
OTTERBRING: The presence of this physically that the effect was even greater AS MUCH AS WOMEN competitive behavior instead.
imposing guy in a store uniform as soon for male customers of short DID WHEN THE FIT There were, of course, other
MALE EMPLOYEE
as people walked in the door did seem to stature. We think this is because WAS PRESENT. store employees around during
change the way that men shopped. When the physically fit male we our field study. But we only
he was there, the average bill for male used activated the classic male compared purchases made when
shoppers came to about $165—more than competitive instinct. We know that this particular male employee was
double the average of $72 that women tall, athletic-looking men typically have pres ent against those made when he
spent during those times and much higher greater success in economic and mating was absent. We suspected that smaller
than what either men or women spent markets. So when male shoppers saw male employees wouldn’t elicit the same
when the employee was absent, which him, we suspect, they sensed a rival and effect and found support for that theory
was $92 for men and $97 for women. The responded by signaling their own status: in a series of later lab studies. Shorter
average price per item men paid was also They opened their wallets. men just don’t seem to trigger the same
higher—$18, versus about $10 when the evolutionary urge to show off.
employee wasn’t at the door, which was HBR: And female employees—or less
also the same amount women paid per imposing male ones—wouldn’t inspire Why wouldn’t the women also
item at any time. the same reaction? Previous research spend more money in the presence
My coauthors and I did this study in has shown that men are indeed more of a physically dominant guy? In
conjunction with the Service Research inclined to try to prove their superiority an evolutionary sense, it’s been more
Center, CTF, at Karlstad University. when exposed to physically attractive advantageous for women to play up their
Interestingly, in later research we found women. We wanted to explore intrasexual beauty and health than to highlight their

36 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2018