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

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.