Having less or saving more: the role of social responsibility perception in reducing guilt over luxury purchases

Purpose This paper aims to challenge the notion that “having-less” – limiting consumption of scarce resources to a select few – represents a social responsibility route toward guilt reduction. It rather argues that “saving-more” – the purposeful pursuit of conscious and collaborative consumption – captures consumers’ true representations of responsible luxury which in turn reduces anticipated guilt. Design/methodology/approach Six experiments using different operationalizations of saving-more (vs. having-less) and a mix of fictitious and real luxury brands were conducted on real luxury buyers. Findings The findings demonstrate that saving-more (vs. having-less) leads to a stronger purchase intention; an effect explained by a higher responsible luxury perception and lower anticipated guilt associated with saving-more (vs. having-less). Furthermore, the ability of saving-more (vs. having-less) in building responsible luxury perception and reducing anticipated guilt is stronger (vs. weaker) when luxury is distributed based on deservingness (vs. entitlement). Research limitations/implications This research proposes a novel distinction between two responsible luxury approaches: promoting limited consumption for business goals, that is, having-less and promoting conscious consumption for societal goals, that is, saving-more. Practical implications Brand managers can enhance responsible luxury perception and reduce consumer guilt through corporate communication, product communication and collaborative product accessibility modes. Managers must also convince consumers that their access to luxury is based on real achievements. Originality/value This study empirically invalidates the notion that merely invoking scarcity and rarity tactics is an expression of social responsibility. It integrates social responsibility and fairness accounts of guilt into a coherent theory of guilt over luxury consumption.