The Consumer Psychology of Planned Obsolescence

Planned obsolescence is a concept in engineering that involves deliberately designing a product to stop working after a given period of time. It is planning for the product to become obsolete. This policy of design apparently finds its way into a host of items that we use everyday. From light bulbs to bakeware to batteries to cars, most products are accused of at least having some degree of planned obsolescence built into their manufacture. The question is, 'Is planned obsolescence ethical?' Is it socially responsible for companies to design products to have an end-life? Is it beneficial to consumers? Is it right?

If cars weren't built with planned obsolescence, perhaps we would never have to buy a car again. If light bulbs weren't built with planned obsolescence, we would never have to change a light bulb again. Everyone would have to do a lot less spending and everyone would still have everything they need, right?

I'm not sure it's quite that simple. If light bulbs were made to last forever, what would the people who research, design, manufacture, test, and sell light bulbs to for a living? They could find another job, I suppose, since they are no longer useful. Let's say they start making batteries. Yet, what do they do when they are finished making batteries? Eventually, people are going to run out of things to do because they are operating on business models designed to fail. Naturally, people have to have income that will sustain them for life. Therefore, the researchers, designers, manufacturers, testers, and sellers of light bulbs won't stop making light bulbs. Instead, they will make light bulbs that last forever and sell them at a price that will sustain their livelihoods. Therefore, it will cost the average person an astronomical amount to get a light bulb or a skillet or a battery--because built into these enduring products will be the lifetime incomes of the employees behind them.

What if this concept were applied to motor vehicles? Cars are already among the most expensive products people will buy in their lives. What if they were all designed to last forever? The automotive industry is one of the largest in the world. The removal of planned obsolescence in automobiles would result both in the loss of probably 90% of the jobs and the astronomical price increase of an automobile for the average person. The result of such a phenomenon would be that only the very richest would have cars to drive. Likewise, only the wealthy would own light bulbs, batteries, bakeware, you name it.

You can already see this played out to some extent. There are products within given categories that last longer and thus cost more than other products within that same category. Shoes that last longer (of course there are other factors involved as well) are typically more expensive than shoes that do not. Computers that are built to last longer are typically more expensive than computers built to last a short period of time. The list goes on.

What about services? Nearly all services involve planned obsolescence. The party providing the service only provides that service for a set period of time before the party requesting the service is required to pay again. Magazine subscriptions. Tax preparation. Haircuts. Lawncare. Plumbing. Electrical contracting. None of these services last forever. If they did, they would not be sustainable.

Planned obsolescence doesn't seem so bad now, does it? I know that perhaps I too am simplifying the issue from the opposite end of the ideological spectrum, but I think it helps to think of things realistically. There are environmental issues involving waste to be considered, of course, but the economic impact of refusing planned obsolescence cannot be ignored. So, next time a light bulb goes out and you start to curse GE, be greatful instead that you had enough money to buy it and you'll also have enough money to replace it.