GEORGE B.

SPROLES

This paper reviews the evolution and current state of fashion

theory focusing on fashion life cycles. Fashion cycles are
analyzed in two time frames, long run secular trends spanning
decades and centuries, and short run acceptance of specific
styles lasting several months to years. The emergence of
new styles is described alternatively as a phenomenon propa-
gated by the fashion industry and independent consumer
behavior. Some needed theoretical developments, research,
and managerial applications are discussed.

ANALYZING FASHION LIFE

CYCLES PRINCIPLES AND
PERSPECTIVES

T HE concept of product life cycles is frequently

used to analyze marketing phenomena and con-
sumers' choice processes. Though many products
and services are assumed to have life cycles, perhaps
none have more distinct cycles than fashions. Fa-
shions are, by definition, temporary cyclical phe-
nomena adopted by consumers for a particular time
and situation. I Furthermore, fashions evolve con-
sistent with the theoretical product life cycle, having
stages of introduction and adoption by fashion
leaders, increasing public acceptance (growth), mass
conformity (maturation), and the inevitable decline
and obsolescence awaiting all fashions.
The phenomenon of fashion invades consumers'
choices of many products and services. Clothing
is clearly the classic product of fashion-oriented
behavior, but fashion also touches consumers'
I See Sproles (1979) for complete definitions offashion and further
discussion.
George B. Sproles is Professor of Clothing, Textiles. and
Interior Design, University of Arizona, Tucson.
aesthetic choices ranging from autos and housing
to foods and music. Indeed fashion-oriented behav-
ior has even been identified with intellectual pursuits
of science, literature, arts, and education. Most
literature focuses on clothing fashions, with literally
thousands of books and articles published, and it
is here that fashion theory and empiricism is cen-
tered with virtual exclusivity. Yet scholars have
been enticed to think of fashion as a generalized
phenomenon of human behavior, and this is a useful
expansion of the domain of fashion theory.
What is the current state of our knowledge of
the life cycles of fashion-oriented objects? This
paper reviews established principles and contrasting
perspectives on this subject. We begin with an
overview of the current state of fashion theory
which considers fashion cycles in two time frames,
long run secular trends spanning decades and cen-
turies, and short run acceptance of specific styles
for periods of several months to years. The central
part of the review describes alternate views of how
the fashion industry and consumer behavior propa-
gate new trends. We conclude with a discussion
of needed theoretical developments, research, and
managerial applications.

Journal of Marketing
116 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1981 Vol. 45 (Fall 1981), 116-124.
The Current State of Fashion Theory
Fashion theory includes a loosely organized array
of descriptive principles and propositions but is not
formalized in that it does not specify a detailed
structure of concepts, variables, and relations. Nor
is it abstract in that it is derived primarily from
the observation of clothing-specific phenomena.
However, many analysts think principles of clothing
fashion are generalizable to a wider range of aes-
thetic, socially visible products and services. The
theory offers contrasting perspectives on such
topics as the role of the marketing system in
diffusing fashions (e.g., the fashion designer as
dictator vs. proposer of new styles), and the types
of consumers who lead the acceptance of new trends
(e.g., the upper class vs. the youthful innovator).
Similarly, fashion theory identifies variables propa-
gating new fashions including psychological, socio-
logical, economic, communicative, and environ-
mental variables.
Fashion theory has developed around two time
frames, long run' cycles, the secular evolution of
one style to the next, spanning decades and cen-
turies, and short run cycles, the seasonal acceptance
of a single style during a period of months to years.
The long run perspective is our lead topic.
Fashion Cycles-The Long Run Time Frame
Observed over decades and centuries, new fashions
are thought to evolve in a historical continuity of
styling changes (Blumer 1969, Sapir 1931). Over
the long run the occurrence of each major style
is proposed to be secular, or to occur only once
in an age or once per century. It is also proposed
that changing fashions cycle in a continuous pro-
gression from one extreme to another over periods
of 30 to 50 years or more. For example, a cycle
of changing dress lengths from extremes of short
to long and then back to short is a change this
principle predicts would take several decades and
2
perhaps even a century.
The major contribution of the principle of his-
torical continuity is the proposition that each new
fashion is an outgrowth or elaboration of the pre-
viously existing fashion. Thus new fashions are
2The principle of historical continuity in women's dress has
substantial empirical documentation (Carman 1966; Kroeber 1919;
Richardson and Kroeber 1940; Robinson 1958, 1975, 1976; Weeden
1977; Young 1937). Findings generally indicate a secular. cyclical,
and continuous pattern of change in silhouettes and major dimen-
sions such as skirt length and width. Recent studies show a
quickening of change during the past 40 years and perhaps more
variation in fashions, but the principle of historical continuity
remains unchallenged.
Analyzing Fashion Life Cycles-Principles and Perspectives / 117
predicted to represent relatively small styling
changes rather than revolutionary or visually
dramatic changes from the recent past. For example,
a major change in dress lengths from knee to floor
length in a year's time would constitute a revolu-
tionary change, and the principle of historical con-
tinuity predicts that such a dramatic change in a
short time would not receive acceptance. Simple
behavioral reasons may account for this: such a
radical change might be perceived by fashion entre-
preneurs as too risky, and it might be perceived
by consumers as too innovative or faddish.
Marketers can benefit from understanding the
historical continuity of design for their particular
product offerings. Obvious applications are in areas
of new product design, prediction of trends, and
development of merchandising strategy. However,
long run data on design history point only to the
gross, broadly defined parameters of change. Thus
a long run trend in skirt lengths or auto lengths
may be apparent when decades of data are observed
in aggregate, but the data indicate year-to-year
variations may be more violent and perhaps random.
Furthermore, basic design details such as orna-
mentation, color, fabric, and trim may exhibit no-
ticeable yearly changes. And it is within a year-to-
year, or more often season-to-season framework
that many important marketing decisions must be
made. Arguably this reduces the potential utility
of long run data on the styling history of products.
Nevertheless, proponents of the principle of
historical continuity persuasively argue that long
run trends in silhouettes and garment dimensions
are the integrating forces in fashion trends, and
consumers' resistance to minor changes in these
components as well as other details of design will
be modest. In an age where variety and individuality
are promoted and accepted by consumers as desir-
able, it becomes quite likely that minor year-to-year
variations will be very acceptable even when ran-
domly produced. If this speculation is valid, pro-
ducers and marketers of new styles face little risk
of rejection no matter what they design as long
as they maintain long run direction consistent with
the trend in historical continuity.
Fashion Cycles-The Short Run Perspective
The second time frame of fashion cycles and the
one of greatest immediacy to most scholars and
entrepreneurs focuses on the life of a single specific
fashion. This is where the classic concept of product
life cycles is applicable to fashions and has been
applied for over 50 years (e.g., Nystrom 1928). A
single fashion cycle typically lasts several years
and sometimes as long as 5 to 10 years.'
Analyzing the life cycle of a specific fashion
requires consideration of several perspectives. One
focuses on fashion designers and the fashion in-
dustry as initiators and propagators of new fashions.
Another focuses on consumer leaders of trends and
processes of consumer behavior in the acceptance
of trends. The latter has yielded numerous perspec-
tives of consumer behavior, ranging from the trick-
le-down theory to the collective selection theory.
These perspectives will now be reviewed.
Industry as Propagator of New
Fashions
The very survival of the fashion industry depends
on regular style changes. Annually or seasonally
a substantial proportion of consumers must be
persuaded or must freely choose to replace older
fashions neither worn out nor functionally obsolete.
But to what extent does the industry playa directly
influential role in propagating such changes?
Historically the fashion industry has been
ascribed a most powerful, almost dictatorial control
over fashion trends. This role has particularly been
identified with well publicized high fashion de-
signers in Europe and the U. S. The trade media
of the fashion industry, especially Women's Wear
Daily, are also occasionally viewed as powerful
forces on industry's choices and ultimately those
of consumers. Other forces also favor an industry
impact. Recently there has been a massive growth
in the number of publicized fashion designers in
both men's and women's fields, accompanied by
continued growth in channels of publicity. Fashion
designers and some producers have recently begun
mass communications of fashion trends and designer
brands on TV and radio as well as traditional fashion
media, thus becoming the last major consumer-
oriented industry to adopt this media strategy. Mass
retailers become unintentional dictators of choice
when certain dominant trends are offered and pro-
moted almost exclusively, giving consumers little
3 Styles lasting only a short period, a matter of weeks or months,
are appropriately termed fads. Those receiving continued acceptance
for a decade or longer are referred to as classics. Fads are usually
distinguished from fashions in being dramatically divergent from
the long run trend in historical continuity of fashion; indeed a
fad may be bizarre and exotic. Fads are adopted by only a small
part of a population, or perhaps by a single subculture. Classics,
at the other extreme, are very basic styling concepts that have
received long-term acceptance across virtually all market segments.
They are perceived by consumers to have enduring aesthetic quality
and social acceptability. The classic is far from bizarre or unusual
in sensory stimulation; it is more likely to be modest and unobtrusive,
to evoke a psychosocial sense of stability and security.
118 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1981
latitude of choice except perhaps in colors and less
conspicuous design details. Therefore, as unappeal-
ing as it may be, it is hard to deny that the industry
has a role in persuading, if not coercing, the direction
of fashion trends. The magnitude of this influence
and the identity of particular centers of influence
(e.g., designers, media, retailers) is unknown and
varies between styles and times. And if the number
of major brand name designers and large manufac-
turers continues to grow, with concommitant
expansion of mass fashion promotion, the industry's
influence may continue to expand.
Though anecdotes abound, there is surprisingly
little empirical documentation of industry's role in
propagating fashion trends. However, two studies
raise interesting questions. One historical study
indicates that fashions of the early twentieth cen-
tury, which were frequently credited to famed
French designer Paul Poiret, were in fact inspired
at least as much by fashion illustrators, other
designers, and "historically complex" forces (Behl-
ing and Dickey 1980). Another study focuses on
the initial rej ection of midi dresses when first
introduced in 1969-1970 (Reynolds and Darden
1972). The style was highly promoted by the fashion
press and was decreed by some as a certain trend,
but it was rejected by consumer opinion leaders
and did not achieve mass acceptance. The inescapa-
ble conclusion from such studies of key events in
fashion history is that changing fashion is a far
more complex phenomenon than those with in-
dustry-centered views might wish to believe.
Consumer Behavior as Propagator of
New Fashions
Many scholars, industry analysts, and journalists
strongly deny the fashion industry can either dictate
or manage consumers' acceptance of changing
trends. Instead they suggest that consumer leader-
ship of trends is made possible and perhaps neces-
sary by the variety of styles available to consumers,
relaxed social norms governing socially appropriate
dress, massive competition at all levels of industry,
and the individuality that modern consumers de-
mand.
As an alternative to industrial leadership of
trends, proponents point to consumers as the chief
initiators and propagators of what will become
fashionable. Even here, however, controversy
exists regarding the form of leadership. Four major
theories propose competing perspectives of how
consumers determine the course of new trends.
These are the upper class leadership theory, the
mass market theory, the subcultural innovation
theory, and the collective selection theory. 4
The Upper Class Theory of Fashion
The theory of upper class leadership offers the
classic perspective of the fashion cycle. The theory
is eloquently stated by German social philosopher
Georg Simmel (1904):
Social forms, apparel, aesthetic judgment, the
whole style of human expression are constantly
transformed by fashion, in such a way, however,
that fashion in all these things affects only the
upper classes. Just as soon as the lower classes
begin to copy their style, thereby crossing the line
of demarcation the upper classes have drawn and
destroying the uniformity of their coherence, the
upper classes tum away from this style and adopt
a new one, which in its own tum differentiates
them from the masses; and thus the game goes
merrily on. Naturally, the lower classes look and
strive toward the upper, and they encounter least
resistance in those fields which are subject to the
whims of fashion; for it is here that mere external
imitation is most readily applied. . . .
This is often referred to as the trickle-down theory
since it implies once adopted by the upper class,
fashions are imitated by each succeeding lower class
until they have "trickled-down" to the lowest class.
Closely associated with the upper class theory
is an implication that new fashions are first and
most prominently displayed by the wealthy leisure
class. In his classic The Theory of the Leisure Class,
Veblen (1912) pointed out that the increasing wealth
of the leisure class gave need to display conspicuous
consumption of products symbolizing wealth. This
can be achieved by consuming many products, but
Veblen identified apparel as the most constant visual
evidence of wealth.
Viewing fashion leadership as a function of class
and wealth has a long tradition of historical support
that continues today. The twentieth century fashion
industry has always emphasized elite-oriented fa-
shion, and lesser fashion designers and producers
frequently copy the designs of their more famed
and elite counterparts. The most prominent and
expensive designers traditionally receive the vast
majority of editorial publicity in fashion media.
Nearly all books of fashion history and museum
collections chronicle exclusive and aristocratic fa-
shions. Based on such historical precedents it is
easy to conclude that fashion has traditionally been
the province of the wealthy, upper class, celebrated
few. But the degree to which fashions trickled to
the lower classes is difficult to document, for there
·See Sproles (1981) and Wills and Midgley (1973) for collections
of classic articles on these theories.
Analyzing Fashion Life Cycles-Principles and Perspectives / 119
is little record of lower class fashions either in
historical collections or art from most periods of
history.
However, in the earlier twentieth century there
was an expanding perspective of fashion leadership.
For example, in 1928 marketing professor Nystrom
noted a shifting of leadership from upper classes
to "fashion conscious social groups." Fashion mer-
chant Daniels (1951) noted that fashion cycles had
greatly accelerated, and that nearly everyone want-
ed the same thing instantaneously due to new forces
of mass production, mass communications, and
changing lifestyles. Robinson (1961) reaffirmed the
trickle-down theory but added the implication of
a simultaneous horizontal flow of fashions within
social classes. Such viewpoints have had major roles
in developing the contemporary mass market theory
of fashion.
The Mass Market Theory
The mass market theory proposes that mass pro-
duction combined with mass communications make
new styles and information about new styles avail-
able simultaneously to all socioeconomic classes.
Therefore, fashion diffusion has the opportunity
to start at essentially the same time within each
class. Given this orientation, the mass market theory
is sometimes referred to as the horizontal flow or
trickle-across theory.
The mass market theory is founded on the
principle that real leadership of fashion comes from
within an individual's own social class and peer
groups. This view came into prominence through
the classic study of opinion leadership by Katz and
Lazarsfeld (1955). They proposed that the most
important fashion leader is not necessarily some
glamorous but anonymous person displaying expen-
sive styles. Rather, they suggest fashion influence
occurs informally between personal friends in-
teracting in similar social circles.
In an important paper viewed as the genesis
of the mass market theory, King (1963) offers four
arguments why fashion spread simultaneously in
all classes:
• During a fashion season, the fashion in-
dustry's marketing strategy assures simulta-
neous adoption of new styles in all socioeco-
nomic groups. The new styles, including
silhouette, fabric, color, and detail changes
are usually available to all consumers at the
same time.
• Consumers freely choose from a large variety
of existing and new styles each season, and
can freely satisfy personal tastes and needs
 rather than follow the lead of an upper class.
• Each social class has its own fashion innova-
tors and opinion leaders, who begin new
fashions within their peer social networks.
• Fashion information and personal influence
trickles across each social class, with fashion
influence between social equals dominating
the vertical flow of fashion from upper to
lower classes.'
To many contemporary analysts fashion diffu-
sion across social classes simultaneously is the most
pervasive fashion process. Assuming the marketing
system makes new styles immediately and widely
available in all prices, the mass market theory
appears as a persuasive model of fashion leadership
and diffusion.
The Subcultural Leadership Theory
A newer theory of fashion is one we may term
the subcultural innovation theory. In recent history
many new fashions have been initiated by subcul-
tural groups such as blacks, youths, blue collar
workers, and ethnic minorities such as Indians
(Blumberg 1974, Field 1970). These and other sub-
cultures can thus generate a wholly new process
of fashion diffusion.
The mechanism of subcultural innovation and
diffusion is only sketchily known, and research is
nonexistent. However, we may speculate on the
process. First, few subcultures will lead strictly from
their socially ascribed class, status, or prestige, for
most subcultures rate low on these. More likely
a subculture leads simply by virtue of its ability
to invent new styles creatively. In some subcultures
these innovations may be no more than customary
artifacts of their culture. Others may be styles
resurrected from the past or perhaps homemade
inventions, as in the cases of blue jeans and tie-dyed
products pioneered in the 1960s by youths. Even-
tually the unique style of a subculture, whether
new or customary, may be noticed by the larger
population and become admired for its creativity,
artistic excellence, or relevance to current life-
styles. At that point, the style emerges from the
subculture and diffuses into the mass population.
Perhaps this diffusion occurs by a trickle-down
'Research supports key parts of these propositions. Katz and
Lazarsfeld (1955) found opinion leaders at all status levels, although
there were fewer among low status groups. King (1963) found
innovators average rather than elite in social positions and modest
in incomes; opinion leaders were found at all incomes, and the
vast majority of their influential relations were with people of similar
status. Grindereng (1967) found similar silhouettes and design details
available and selling to all class levels at the same time.
120 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1981
process, where the style skips from the originating
subculture to the upper class and then trickles down.
Alternatively, the mass market mechanism may take
control, as mass production makes the object
available to innovators throughout consumer mar-
kets. In such ways the admired symbols of subcul-
tural identity are selectively assimilated into the
dominant culture.
The Theory of Collective Selection
The most general theory of leadership is one sug-
gesting that nearly any creative or innovative indi-
viduals can become leaders of fashion trends, pro-
vided their innovative choices are reasonably in
line with the social climate and life-styles of the
times. The principal elements of such a theory are
outlined by sociologist Blumer (1969), a theorist
on the sociology of collective behavior. 6
Like other analysts, Blumer argues that fashion
leadership is no longer confined to the upper class.
Instead he suggests that new fashions emerge from
a process of collective selection, a process by which
collective tastes are formed by many people. In
this process, many new styles will compete for
acceptance by consumers. Those styles most closely
representing the existing trend in consumers' tastes
will slowly gain a competitive edge through increas-
ing acceptance and finally will become fashionable.
When a new fashion trend is starting, initially
consumers' tastes will be vaguely defined, but the
selections of innovators will give more precise
statement of appropriate tastes. The innovator's
prestige may also further legitimize his/her choice.
Thus a new trend in collective tastes is established.
Blumer also notes that innovators' selections must
be in line with the historical continuity of fashions
to receive collective acceptance (Blumer 1969).
The collective selection perspective integrates
many established principles of fashion diffusion-
the role of innovators, the origination of leadership
from centers of prestige, the requirement of histori-
cal continuity, the idea that fashions reflect the
spirit of the times, and the principle that fashions
represent manifestations of collective tastes in mass
society. But description of the crucial mechanisms
of collective selection and formation of collective
tastes is vague. Some may think of it as irrational
social contagion or crowd behavior (the "bandwa-
gon effect," the "herd instinct"). It is more likely
that modem theories of social interaction, mass
marketing, and economics offer more detailed and
"Other contributors to this theory include Klapp (1969), Lang
and Lang (1961), and Robinson (1975).
rational models of the forces on mass consumer
choices."
Needed Developments
Fashion theory currently offers many useful princi-
ples for understanding consumers' acceptance of
aesthetic products. These principles yield helpful
applications to product planning and development
of marketing or retailing strategy tied to life cycles
and key market segments such as innovators. In
particular, conceptualization of fashion in long run
and short run time frames focuses attention on the
important design history of fashion objects, and
to the variety of processes through which consumers
accept specific new styles. To conclude, we will
now identify areas where further developments are
needed, focusing on more complete theoretical
specification, research, and managerial application.
Theoretical Specification
Fashion theory has several key shortcomings. One
is that theories delineate the initiation and propaga-
tion of new trends, but except for the trickle-down
theory, do not significantly deal with latter life cycle
stages leading to termination. The literature suggests
established fashions decline from forces of market
saturation, social saturation (overuse), boredom, the
desire for novelty, loss of prestige or exclusivity,
planned obsolescence by industry, and social ob-
solescence forced by social change (Sproles 1979).
Thus many forces can be involved, but details on
the process are limited.
A second area for development is to identify
the full spectrum of market segments operating at
each stage of the fashion cycle. Most work examines
7 Many other theories offer potentially insightful explanations of
fashion changes, though few provide a complete analysis of the
fashion cycle or a basis for predicting the diffusion of new styles.
One popular theory explains changing fashions as a function of
enhancing sex appeal; the notion of "shifting erogenous zones"
(Bergler 1953, FliigeI1930), or using new fashions to shift attention
to different parts of the body, is frequently cited here. Self identity
theory and the "uniqueness motivation" theory explain clothing
choices as identity seeking, "ego screaming," and even social
deviancy or masquerading (e.g., Fromkin 1973; Klapp 1969; Snyder
and Fromkin 1980). Some analysts have attempted to link social
and economic changes with evolution of new styles (e.g., Kroeber
1919, Young 1937); the popular but unverified assertion that skirt
lengths rise and fall with business cycles is one example. A history
centered theory suggests fashions are usually resurrected from the
past; in fact, fashion history shows the body has been dressed
and decorated in nearly every conceivable manner, thus making
history a ready source of innovations. A culture centered theory
notes new styles may originate from cross-cultural diffusion; when
one culture contacts another, a notable result is often the transfer
of material artifacts including dress. Finally, a modernism theory
proposes fashions change with the times, or that new life-styles
require complementary fashions.
Analyzing Fashion Life Cycles-Principles and Perspectives / 121
fashion leaders but ignores the remainder of the
mass market. One scheme suggests considering as
many as nine segments through the life cycle:
innovators, opinion leaders, innovative commun-
icators (those who are both innovators and opinion
leaders), fashion conscious consumers (an all-en-
compassing market including all preceding seg-
ments), followers (mass market consumers, fol-
lowers of established trends), laggards (late adop-
ters, those favoring classics), deviants (noncon-
formists, subcultures), disintegrators (a speculative
segment whose acceptance, or termination of use
of a fashion indicates its decline), and nonfashion
conscious consumers (nonadopters, isolates, the
disinterested). Delineation of the complete market
structure would be a useful step, but to date this
has focused only on the first four segments (Sproles
and King 1973).
A more subtle limitation is that fashion theory
is virtually silent on the perceptual processes by
which consumers identify and mentally process the
existence of new styles. How much change is
required before a new object is perceived as dif-
ferent from its predecessor? How much change will
be tolerated before overstimulation occurs, i.e., the
style is perceived as too innovative? Do perceptual
processes differ among aesthetic components of
silhouette, color, and design details? These are
important issues both in establishing how consumers
learn to accept new fashions and because con-
sumers' perceptions determine the minimum and
maximum boundaries of change acceptable at any
given time. This is clearly the frontier topic of
fashion theory and one where perceptual psycholo-
gy, aesthetics, and information processing theory
may contribute.
Ultimately what will emerge will be a middle
range theory of consumer behavior specifically
geared toward fashions and other objects where
aesthetics and taste are joint determinant attributes
of choice. It is premature to specify a complete
theory, but several general principles outlining a
theory encompassing all stages of the fashion life
cycle may be derived from this paper:
• New styles enter the beginnings of life cycles
from centers of prestige and creativity, in-
cluding both creative entrepreneurs and fa-
shion conscious consumers.
• Alternative new styles gain public exposure
through a cooperative interplay between
creative entrepreneurs and fashion conscious
consumers who display new alternatives in
their social networks and give them social
visibility.
 • Any new style is most likely to receive
substantial acceptance when two conditions
are met: initial adoption is by a discernible
proportion of fashion conscious consumers,
and the new style is consistent with the
evolving trend in historical continuity for that
class of styles.
• Fashions will diffuse within social networks
composed of people having similar social
class, prestige, life-styles, needs, and values.
Fashion diffuse across classes and social
networks as a result of marketing strategy
(communication and pricing), massed avail-
ability in all types of retail stores, and social
appropriateness to life-styles in the social
networks. These collective forces of the mass
market are more powerful than processes of
upper class leadership and social competition
between classes for symbols.
• When acceptance of a fashion is substantial,
perhaps in one-fourth to one-half of a target
market, two forces will jointly determine
mass acceptance: the pressures of social
conformity, and the likelihood that mass
marketing will increasingly feature the style
exclusively or provide only minimal range
of choice centering on that style.
• Decline and termination begin when two
events coincide: social saturation (overuse)
of a style is evident and consumers' boredom
with the style is apparent, and creative entre-
preneurs and fashion conscious consumers
begin active experimentation with new ideals
of taste that are perceptually different from
the established but overused style.
Research
In comparison to other major consumer products,
fashion is under-researched. This is true not only
in scholarly literature but also in industry where
a modest but growing amount of research is pro-
duced." Some basic issues related to fashion life
cycles have been explored, such as identification
of fashion leaders (e.g., Baumgarten 1975; Grin-
dereng 1967; Katz and Lazarsfeld 1955; King 1963;
Polegato and Wall 1980; Sproles 1977; Sproles and
King 1973; Summers 1970) and styles most likely
to be preferred by consumers (e.g., Sewall 1978a,
"Papers on industry approaches to fashion forecasting, market
segmentation, merchandising, and analysis of consumers' life-styles
are in European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (1974)
and Richards and Rachman (1978). Also see Richards and Sturman
(1977), Stait (1970), and Vreeland (1963) for examples.
122 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1981
1978b; Sproles 1978; Winakor and Goings 1973;
Young, Ott, and Feigin 1978). Of course, hundreds
of studies have been conducted on dress (see Sproles
1979) including most dimensions of consumer be-
havior, but little is cast in the fashion life cycle
framework.
What topics are appropriate for future research?
First, to establish a complete baseline of historical
data it is useful to do evolutionary analysis not
only of basic silhouettes and shapes (e.g., Carman
1966, Weeden 1977) but also on trends in colors,
fabric, and design details of specific objects (e.g.,
Turnbaugh 1979). In this manner the historical
evolution of specific objects would be more com-
pletely documented, providing a more comprehen-
sive framework for product planning and forecast-
ing. Another approach involves longitudinal tracking
of consumer panels, with emphasis on specialized
panels of innovators or other fashion conscious
consumers. In fact, this approach has been used
by some manufacturers and retailers (e.g., in form-
ing College Boards), but formal tracking of new
trends is not a widely institutionalized activity. A
more exploratory approach is to experiment with
indicators of fashion change and termination. For
instance, perhaps an index of social saturation or
boredom could be devised to predict the onset of
decline and obsolescence of established fashions.
Finally, expanded segmentation research is needed
to characterize all segments of the complete market
structure for fashions.
Managerial Applications
The fashion cycle concept is widely applied by
manufacturers and retailers but often at an intuitive
rather than scientific level. For instance, in any
new fashion season a producer may propose
hundreds of designs ranging from classics and
established fashions (basic merchandise) to very
innovative designs and a few exotic items (promo-
tional items not expected to sell). Similarly, retailers
develop assortment policies stating a certain per-
centage of merchandise in each fashion classifica-
tion. These judgments are sometimes made with
uncanny anticipation of retail buyers' and con-
sumers' preferences; often they are made as much
to spread risks across a larger number of alternative
styles.
For manufacturers and retailers who make such
assortment decisions, a systematic knowledge of
the correct life cycle position of each style is crucial.
However, there are some significant obstacles pre-
venting many from investing in such a complete
information system. Most importantly, the fashion
business is not organized around fashion life cycles
but around seasonal or annual merchandising cycles.
This is a matter of traditional marketing policy,
and it is often efficient for managing inventory,
cash flow, and store image (e.g., the seller always
features fresh styles). Thus the decision making
frame is a matter of months, whereas the life of
fashions spans years. In the rush to make short
run production and merchandising decisions, only
the most foresighted can apply the longer range
view of life cycles. Nevertheless, for those market-
ers who have long lead times from designing through
producing and marketing a line, especially mass
marketers who have lead times of a year or more,
predicting the fashion cycle is an inescapable acti-
vity.
A more pervasive obstacle to scientific analysis
of life cycles is that the fashion industry has a
mystique that forecasting is an art, a matter of
intuition that requires a feel for the market. Particu-
larly in predicting new trends, entrepreneurs view
themselves more as gamblers than management
scientists. Thus when systematic research is
proposed many are skeptical. One frequent theme
is that fashion is not susceptible to science, and
that data are only historical and have no value for
forecasting. Clearly the value of life cycle analysis
has to be proven for specific applications. But a
REFERENCES
Baumgarten, Steven A. (1975), "The Innovative Communi-
cator in the Diffusion Process," Journal of Marketing
Research, 12 (February), 12-18.
Behling, Dorothy U. and Lois E. Dickey (1980), "Haute
Couture: A 25-Year Perspective of Fashion Influences,
1900 to 1925," Home Economics Research Journal, 8
(July), 428-436.
Bergler, Edmund (1953), Fashion and the Unconscious, New
York: Robert Brunner.
Blumberg, Paul (1974), "The Decline and Fall of the Status
Symbol: Some Thoughts on Status in a Post-Industrial
Society," Social Problems, 21 (April), 480-498.
Blumer, Herbert (1969), "Fashion: From Class Differentia-
tion to Collective Selection," Sociological Quarterly, 10
(Summer), 275-291.
Carman, James M. (1966), "The Fate of Fashion Cycles
in Our Modern Society," Science, Technology, and Mar-
keting, Raymond M. Haas, ed., Chicago: American Mar-
keting Association.
Daniels, Alfred H. (1951), "Fashion Merchandising," Har-
vard Business Review, 29 (May), 51-60.
European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research
(1974), Fashion Research and Marketing, Amsterdam:
European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research.
Field, George A. (1970), "The Status Float Phenomenon:
The Upward Diffusion of Innovation," Business Hori-
zons, 13 (August), 45-52.
Analyzing Fashion Life Cycles-Principles and Perspectives / 123
more subtle problem must be confronted, the
buyer's or product manager's desire to maintain
his/her status and authority as expert judge and
interpreter of trends. This introduces a human
relations element, one where tactful, slow, and
sometimes painful re-education of personnel is
needed.
Fortunately there are signs of progress. Large
manufacturers and retailers conduct standard mar-
ket research, some on market monitoring of fashion
cycles (however, smaller firms that are predominant
in the industry rarely have resources for this).
Fashion tracking services such as RAM Data Ser-
vices and consumer panels on clothing have func-
tioned for over a decade. Recently there has been
growing retailer adoption of computerized manage-
ment information systems capable of instantaneous
capture of data and analysis of sales by styles.
Though technology is well ahead of application,
the trend of acceptance is positive. Thus we con-
clude with a positive note. The fashion life cycle
concept is of recognized merit, is relatively well
accepted, and is even thriving in some applications.
The fashion business is inextricably tied to fashion
life cycles, and those who correctly analyze and
anticipate these cycles are most likely to succeed.
Fliigel, John Carl (1930), The Psychology ofClothes, London:
Hogarth Press.
Fromkin, Howard L. (1973), The Psychology of Uniqueness:
A voidance of Similarity and Seeking of Differentness,
West Lafayette, IN: Institute for Research in the Behav-
ioral, Economic and Management Sciences, Purdue Uni-
versity.
Grindereng, Margaret P. (1967), "Fashion Diffusion," Jour-
nal of Home Economics, 59 (March), 171-174.
Katz, Elihu and Paul F. Lazarsfeld (1955), Personal In-
fluence, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
King, Charles W. (1963), "Fashion Adoption: A Rebuttal
to the 'Trickle Down' Theory," in Toward Scientific
Marketing, Stephen A. Greyser, ed., Chicago: American
Marketing Association, 108-125.
Klapp, Orrin (1969), Collective Search for Identity, New
York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kroeber, A. L. (1919), "On the Principle of Order in
Civilization as Exemplified by Changes of Fashion,"
American Anthropologist, 21, 235-263.
Lang, Kurt and Gladys Lang (1961), Collective Dynamics,
New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.
Nystrom, Paul H. (1928), Economics of Fashion, New York:
Ronald Press.
Polegato, Rosemary and Marjorie Wall (1980), "Information
Seeking by Fashion Opinion Leaders and Followers,"
Home Economics Research Journal, 8 (May), 327-338.
Reynolds, Fred D. and William R. Darden (1972), "Why
the Midi Failed," Journal of Advertising Research, 12
(August), 39-44.
Richards, Elizabeth A. and David Rachman, eds. (1978),
Market Information and Research in Fashion Manage-
ment, Chicago: American Marketing Association.
- - - , and Stephen S. Sturman (1977), "Life-Style Seg-
mentation in Apparel Marketing," Journal of Marketing,
41 (October), 89-91.
Richardson, Jane and A. L. Kroeber (1940), "Three Cen-
turies of Women's Dress Fashions, A Quantitative An-
alysis," Anthropological Records, 5 (October), 111-153.
Robinson, Dwight E. (1958), "Fashion Theory and Product
Design," Harvard Business Review, 36 (November-De-
cember), 126-138.
---(1961), "The Economics of Fashion Demand,"
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75 (August), 376-398.
- - - (1975), "Style Changes: Cyclical, Inexorable, and
Foreseeable," Harvard Business Review, 53 (November-
December), 121-131.
- - - (1976), "Fashions in Shaving and Trimming of the
Beard: The Men of the Illustrated London News, 1842-
1972," American Journal of Sociology, 81 (March), 1133-
1141.
Sapir, Edward (1931), "Fashion," in Encyclopedia of the
Social Sciences, Vol. VI, Edwin R. A. Seligman, ed.,
New York: Macmillan, 139-144.
Sewall, Murphy A. (1978a), "Market Segmentation Based
on Consumer Ratings of Proposed Product Designs,"
Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (November), 557-564.
- - - (1978b), "Nonmetric Unidimensional Scaling of
Consumer Preferences for Proposed Product Designs,"
in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. V., H. Keith
Hunt, ed., Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Re-
search, 22-25.
Simmel, Georg (1904), "Fashion," International Quarterly,
10 (October), 130-155.
Snyder, C. R. and Howard L. Fromkin (1980), Uniqueness:
The Human Pursuit of Difference, New York: Plenum
Press.
Sproles, George B. (1977), Clothing Orientations of Adult
Women in Indiana, West Lafayette, IN: Agricultural
124 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1981
Experiment Station, Purdue University.
- - - - (1978), "Fashion Preferences and Store Patronage:
A Longitudinal Study," in Advances in Consumer Re-
search, Vol. V., H. Keith Hunt, ed., Ann Arbor: Asso-
ciation for Consumer Research, 675-681.
- - - (1979), Fashion: Consumer Behavior Toward
Dress, Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company.
- - - , ed. (1981), Perspectives of Fashion, Minneapolis:
Burgess Publishing Company.
- - - , and Charles W. King (1973), The Consumer Fa-
shion Change Agent: A Theoretical Conceptualization and
Empirical Identification, West Lafayette, IN: Institute
for Research in the Behavioral, Economic and Manage-
ment Sciences, Purdue University.
Stait, N. H. (1970), "Long-Range Planning in a Fast Changing
Fashion Market," Long Range Planning, 3 (December),
55-60.
Summers, John O. (1970), "The Identity of Women's Cloth-
ing Fashion Opinion Leaders," Journal of Marketing
Research, 7 (May), 178-185.
Turnbaugh, Sarah Peabody (1979), "The Seriation of Fa-
shion," Home Economics Research Journal, 7 (March),
241-248.
Veblen, Thorstein (1912), The Theory of the Leisure Class,
New York: Macmillan.
Vreeland, Carl (1963), "The Jantzen Method of Short-Range
Forecasting," Journal of Marketing, 27 (April), 66-70.
Weeden, Patricia (1977), "Study Patterned on Kroeber's
Investigation of Style," Dress-Journal of the Costume
Society of America, 3, 9-19.
Wills, Gordon and David Midgley, eds. (1973), Fashion
Marketing, London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
Winakor, Geitel and Barbara D. Goings (1973), "Fashion
Preference: Measurement of Change," Home Economics
Research Journal, I (March), 195-209.
Young, Agnes Brooks (1937), Recurring Cycles of Fashion,
1760-1937, New York: Harper and Brothers.
Young, Shirley, Leland Ott, and Barbara Feigin (1978),
"Some Practical Considerations in Market Segmenta-
tion," Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (August), 405-
412.