Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Socio Economic Classes
Socio Economic Classes
Terms like, SEC A, SEC B, and the like are freely tossed around by all,
however, only a few know their real meaning. Very few, for example, may be
aware that many traders, who may be affluent with more spending power than
most executives will fail to make the ‘high’ grade, if they are not graduates.
Although, MRUC & Hansa Research have come up with a new concept of
Household Potential Index (HPI) to reclassify consumers, SEC continues to
remain universally referenced classification of consuming classes. While, a
detailed postings on HPI will soon follow, we explain below the basis of
classification of different urban SEC categories and their relative importance in
relation to marketing/ retailing potential:
The CWEs of nearly half the SEC A households work in executive positions.
The other half comprises mainly of industrialist/businessmen or shop owners.
Almost all of them are either graduates or post graduates. CWEs of SEC B
households are primarily employed at clerical or supervisory levels (46%). 29%
are shopkeepers while 10% are industrialist/businessmen. Less than half are
graduates or post graduates (45%). 38% are educated till the 10th or 12th grade,
while 13% have had some college education. (* IRS 1998-1999 refers to IRS
round, July 98-May 99)
The mid socioeconomic class (SEC C) comprises households whose CWEs are
employed at clerical or supervisory levels (37%), skilled workers (33%), petty
traders (12%) or shop owners (18%). Three quarters of them are educated till
the 10th or 12th grade while the rest have attended school till a maximum of the
9th grade. Less than half the CWEs of households belonging to the low
socioeconomic classes (SEC D&E) are unskilled workers. About 28% are
skilled
workers while 18% are petty traders. 45% have attended school till a maximum
of the 9th grade and 31% are illiterate.
According to data sourced from the Indian Readership Survey (IRS 1998-1999),
urban households have increased their average monthly household income
(MHI) by 2.1 to 2.3 times between 1990 and 1999. The increase in average
MHI has been higher in the low socioeconomic classes (SEC D&E which
account for over 50% of the urban households), i.e. about 14 percentage points
more than the percentage increase in average MHI of the higher socioeconomic
classes (SEC A&B) as shown in Table. This suggests that improvement in the
standard of living has not benefited only the ‘haves’.
NRS (1990-91)
IRS (1998-99) & IRS(1998-990)
% increase in
% avg. MHI
SEC C 21 117
SEC D & E 51 127