With a score of 86 out of a possible 91 on Schwartz’s Maximization Scale (found in Paradox of Choice), I am without a doubt, a maximizer. I do, however, believe that this result accurately reflects my personality – a perfectionist.  I typically find it difficult to make decisions while I’m shopping because I’m constantly comparing colors, features, and prices against the alternatives. This is done out of fear that I won’t choose the “ perfect” product and for me, nothing is more disappointing or frustrating than making a purchase and later finding it at another store in a better color or at a cheaper price after I already removed the tags. Making comparisons and my unnecessary post-purchase shopping is not only time consuming, but it also takes away from the value of my purchase. I am no longer happy with my purchase because I now know that there was something better out there, something even more perfect.

Schwartz makes it clear that maximizer and perfectionist are not synonymous, but he agrees that both set high standards and seek out "the best.”  I think that this would make websites such as Tumblr and Pinterest a maximizer’s dream, or playground if you will.

Schwartz describes maximizers as having expectations that can eventually be met, which means that Pinterest allows maximizers to fantasize about things that are tangible, realistic, and certainly not impossible to achieve.  Fellow Pinners like myself browse through hundreds, maybe even thousands of pins without realizing that we are falling somewhere on the maximization scale.

Despite being indecisive at times, it doesn’t take much for a new product to catch my eye because a product with creative packaging will have me reaching for me wallet in no time. From a marketing perspective, I will be a satisfied consumer if your products are presented in creative, unique, and innovative ways.  As both a perfectionist and a maximizer, I believe these types of products are simply "the best." 

"Choice is essential to autonomy, which is absolutely fundamental to well-being." 
                                           - Barry Schwartz from                      
                                            Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less



Barry Schwartz's The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less is a great and easy read for those studying or just interested in the field of Marketing. This text was required reading for my Consumer Behavior course as it is relevant to every aspect of the consumption patterns of consumers. Schwartz's overall argument is that the elimination of consumer choice will reduce anxiety during the shopping experience - in essence, the more choices, the less happiness. This TED Talk from Schwartz himself offers a brief introduction to the text: 

Everyone is a consumer and everyone must make choices, big or small. However, the multitude of choices in this world can oftentimes complicate the simplest of decisions. Paradox of Choice helps you critically look at consumer choice, presents issues that you probably wish you weren't aware of, and allows you to identify your own consumption patterns and behaviors - personally, it completely changed my outlook on the shopping experience, which can be both a good and bad revelation.

Schwartz presents the issues that consumers are faced with when it comes to consumer choice then offers solutions to overcome these issues. He also analyses the relationships between choice, expectations and happiness, which are his most compelling arguments in Paradox of Choice. However, it is perhaps his introduction and explanation of the terms maximizer and satisficer that I found the most interesting of the entire text as well as the most relevant to my own life as a consumer. A maximizer is someone who must be sure that they are making the best purchase or the best decision possible after comparing all of the alternatives. A satisficer is one who settles for "good enough" and is not worried about the possibility of a better alternative. In this post, I compare my own maximizing habits with perfectionism, which Schwartz believes are related but not synonymous. 

 A few comments that I have about Paradox of Choice are that it tends to be repetitive of Schwartz's overarching argument as the text progresses and due to its 2004 publication date, some of the examples are rather outdated. However, the main themes are still entirely relevant, so it helps to put these into context by applying them to goods and services found in the present-day.  Overall, Paradox of Choice is a quick and easy read and I suggest that anyone interested in, studying, or working in the field of Marketing should definitely check it out.