Comments on: Forcing functions designed to increase product consumption

By: Tearstrip-tease at fulminate // Architectures of Control

Tearstrip-tease at fulminate // Architectures of Control — Fri, 25 May 2007 20:26:11 +0000

[...] Alexander Freitas of the Infinity Squared blog notes the difficulties with frustrating tear-strips on packaging, and, comparing an easier-to-open pack from one manufacturer with a difficult tearstrip from another, suggests (somewhat along the lines of ‘Forcing functions designed to increase product consumption‘), that the company’s thought process may be something like: We will make packaging that a consumer will lose patience trying to open, and so will get a knife, destroy the packaging, and have to eat all those big cookies in one go. We will be rich. [...]

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 20:02:21 +0000

After all, we are meant to consume: past the point where all people can be fed, clothed and sheltered, what else is there to be done? The jobless need to do something.

Interesting philosophy, Tom – thanks for your comments. A forthcoming post on designed-in obsolescence may also be of interest!

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:57:57 +0000

Hi all,

I would like to keep down the fear of Some Big Evil controlling the design of all the stuff to the detriment of the consumers.

People will disregard some features, if they are useless – many must be opening biscuit and chewing gum packs from the top anyway. The “tear here” system has actually improved in some products and now the underlying plastic ribbon actually does its work, although I still never manage to open the CD wrap “properly” (this goes back to the old days of the casette tape).

Also, some product sizes are just ridiculous – like an Actimel bottle, or a half-litre yoghurt pot. Either you don’t have enough (and have to take one more), or you leave it in the fridge and throw it away.

Luckily, there are options, so you can choose the size which is right for you.

After all, we are meant to consume: past the point where all people can be fed, clothed and sheltered, what else is there to be done? The jobless need to do something.

By: Dan

Dan — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 06:11:36 +0000

Cheers Chris,

Those are some really good examples: I did wonder about the move to an opaque Heinz ketchup bottle the other day, but didn’t mentally connect it to this as a reason behind it! (incidentally, there’s something about the opaque red plastic which immediately lowers the perceived value of the product in my mind, somehow: it’s instantly reminiscent of the opaque red, brown and yellow bottles of ketchup, vinegar and mustard you find in greasy spoon cafés and motorway services. That needn’t be a bad thing in itself, of course, but it gives a cheaper impression).

The “discrete (and excessive) quantity” nature of packaging such as the dishwasher/washing machine tablets is an interesting one: I’ll try to find some more examples of that in the wild. It’s so simple, yet overall can have a massive impact on the amount of product sold. It reminds me of petrol pumps where there is a £5 minimum limit on the amount of fuel dispensed (though I don’t know what happens if you can’t fit £5 worth in the tank).

There’s been some mention before of the ‘default’ spirit measures being increased from 25 ml to 35 ml; similarly, the steady increase in average sizes of wine glasses must have an effect on how much is being drunk.

The use-by-date phenomenon is extremely powerful. Think how much medicine – billions of pounds’ worth, potentially, each year – is destroyed worldwide because it’s reached the use-by date, even though it may actually be fine. People don’t want to risk it: it’s a psychological architecture of control based on fear, uncertainty and doubt.

By: chris

chris — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:23:15 +0000

yo dan,
saw your post on core77 – good work. The biscuits thing is really funny because its so obviously designed to make you eat more, I’m going to keep an eye that one to see if the tear strip moves down any further. Here are a few examples of forcing functions that I thought of. One example that crossed my mind the other day is dishwasher and washing machine tablets. Unlike the loose powder where you could measure out exaclty how much you wanted, the tablets restrict your control over the quantity.
Heinze squeezable ketchup bottles are now opaque red instead of transluscent which means you can’t see how much is left in the bottle. Which person at Heinz thought this was a good idea? There must be reasons for the change but to me all it seems to do it prevent you seeing when the bottle is close to finished so you can’t buy a new one in preparation.
Why do eggs have a use by date? Eggs almost never go off and if they do you will know about it as soon as you crack it open because it will stink.

By: Architectures of Control in Design » Embedding control in society: the end of freedom

Sun, 09 Jul 2006 22:20:03 +0000

[...] Biscuit packaging kind of pales into insignificance alongside this stuff. But, ultimately, much the same mindset is evident, I would argue: a desire to control, shape and restrict the behaviour of the public in ways not to the public’s benefit, and the use of technology, design and architecture to achieve that goal. [...]