What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." This famous line by Shakespeare from 'Romeo and Juliet' beautifully captures the essence of our discussion: the power of naming. In the realm of dynamic pricing, the name given to a pricing strategy can have a profound impact on how it is perceived by consumers and can be as pivotal as the fragrance of a rose to its identity.

The power of naming in the world of pricing can't be underestimated. Take, for example, Wendy's recent turmoil over dynamic pricing. A simple mention during an earnings call led the media to dub it 'surge pricing.' This small shift in terminology sparked an uproar, with some customers even calling for a boycott. Wendy's clarified days later that they had not committed to surge pricing, reshaping the narrative to highlight dynamic pricing's customer benefits, like the potential for lower prices and promotions at select times and locations.

The Importance of Framing

The term 'surge pricing' clearly resonates negatively, yet variable pricing strategies are common across various industries and typically slip under the radar of public scrutiny. Think about the widespread acceptance of early bird specials, Taco Tuesdays, or happy hours. Airfare and hotel room pricing also fluctuate, but without triggering public outcry. Why? It's all about framing. If the pricing is portrayed as a benefit to consumers, it's perceived as fair.

This aligns with prospect theory, which shows we view gains and losses through different lenses. The favorable examples I mentioned were all framed as gains, not losses. Imagine if the messaging were reversed, highlighting higher prices after certain hours or on busy days—this would undoubtedly cast these strategies in a negative light as losses, leading to perceptions of unfairness.

My Studies

Before Wendy's dynamic pricing scenario unfolded, I had already embarked on a journey to understand the public's perceptions of various pricing strategies. Four months prior to the Wendy's incident, I conducted an initial study, utilizing a 100-point scale to gauge the emotional reactions to various pricing terms. Participants rated terms from extremely negative to extremely positive. The study revealed a stark contrast: 'surge pricing' and 'demand-based pricing' were met with negativity, while terms related to discounts and deals, such as 'happy hour' and 'Taco Tuesdays,' were embraced positively.

However, the Wendy's episode served as a catalyst for a follow-up study, conducted three weeks after their dynamic pricing mention made headlines. This subsequent research was not an examination of customer responses to Wendy's specifically but a broader inquiry into how different pricing terms fared in the aftermath of such a publicized event. Participants evaluated terms like 'surge pricing,' 'variable pricing,' and 'flexible pricing' for understandability, perceived fairness, and overall acceptance. Notably, 'surge pricing' continued to provoke a strong adverse reaction, being perceived as the least understandable and acceptable and most unfair.

Comparing 'surge pricing' to other terms like 'demand-based pricing' showed little improvement in public sentiment. If you're curious about the statistical nuances behind these findings, feel free to reach out for a detailed dive into the data.

In the comprehensive studies conducted, terms like 'off-peak pricing' and 'variable pricing' surfaced as the most favorably viewed, which may not be coincidental. These terms, arguably, are framed in a way that can be perceived as gains to the customer.

Consider this: 'off-peak pricing' suggests a discount during less busy hours, and 'variable pricing' indicates flexibility and potential for savings, both positive associations in the eyes of consumers.

What Should We Call It?

But as we pivot back to the significance of framing, it begs the question: What should companies call their pricing models? 'Dynamic pricing' was not as negatively received as 'surge pricing,' but in the context of the Wendy's scenario, it might still carry unintended connotations.

The term chosen needs to strike a delicate balance—transparent enough to explain the pricing model but also positive enough not to alienate customers. It's about finding a label that communicates value without implying a loss or disadvantage.

So, what's the alternative? Some might suggest simply referring to it as a 'pricing strategy' to maintain neutrality. But this could come at the cost of losing the communicative power of more descriptive terms. The key lies in choosing terminology that not only informs but also reassures and even entices the customer.

Final Thoughts

In the end, the decision on naming may be less about avoiding all mentions of pricing strategy complexity and more about highlighting the benefits of that strategy. Whether companies choose to be detailed in their pricing communication or opt for a broader, more strategic overview may well depend on their customer base's receptiveness to transparency and complexity.

Thus, the challenge for businesses extends beyond just the selection of a term; it's about constructing a narrative around their pricing strategy that frames it as advantageous to the consumer. Rather than adopting a term potentially tainted by negative press, companies might consider terms that align with consumer benefits, such as 'reward pricing' or 'value-adjusted pricing.'

In essence, the art of naming a pricing strategy is not just a marketing choice but a strategic decision that can influence the success of the pricing model itself. It is less about the mechanics of the pricing and more about the message it sends—ensuring that customers perceive value, fairness, and consideration for their needs.

View source