So you go to a luxury store, walk in, and this happens.

所以你去了一間奢華的店，走進門結果發生了這個。

Hi, I'm looking for a bag.

嗨，我想找包包。

Uh, shhure.

喔，是喔。

Pause.

暫停。

Because of this interaction, you're going to spend more money than you would have before.

因為這個互動，你所花的錢將會超出你預計要花的錢！

It's almost a joke at this point.

現在這已經幾乎變成了一個笑話。

Employees at stores like Louis Vuitton, Prada, and Gucci

Louis Vuitton、Prada 與 Gucci 等精品的店員是惡名昭彰的冷淡且態度極其惡劣，尤其是對那些「看起來不會買」的客人。

are notorious for being standoffish and downright mean to customers who don't look the type.

How much is this?

這件多少？

I don't think this would fit you.

我不認為這件適合妳。

Well, I didn't ask if it would fit, I asked how much it was.

我沒有問它適不適合，我只問它多少錢。

How much is this, Marie?

Marie，這件多少錢？

It's very expensive.

它很貴。

It's very expensive.

它很貴。

According to all rules of retail sales, employees are supposed to be polite, helpful, and nice.

根據所有零售業的規範，店員通常都會被要求應該要有禮貌、樂於幫助且友善。

The customer is always right and all that.

客戶永遠是對的什麼的。

But what if the prevailing opinion was wrong?

但如果這普遍看法是錯的呢？

That's the question that Darren Dahl, a professor at the University of British Columbia decided to ask.

那就是英屬哥倫比亞大學教授 Darren Dahl 決定去問的一個問題。

He conducted a few studies, asking people immediately before, immediately after,

他做了一些調查，詢問人們被店員惡劣對待前、當下與兩週後的想法。

and two weeks after an employee was rude to them.

They included a variety of stores, ranging from Gap to Gucci.

調查範圍涵蓋了許多不同的店家，從 Gap 到 Gucci 都有。

Some of the interactions at the higher end stores went like this:

在一些高端品牌商店的結果是這樣的。

Can I see that one?

我可以看那個包包嗎？

Um, I don't think you'll be interested in that bag.

嗯，我不認為妳會喜歡那個包包。

It's one of our more expensive ones.

這款是我們家比較貴的系列。

Dahl found that in less expensive stores, like Gap, J. Crew, and American Eagle, rude employees had the expected effect.

Dahl 發現在較平價的商店，像 Gap、J. Crew 與 American Eagle 等，惡劣的店員造成了與預期相符的結果。

It drove away customers and made them less likely to buy the product they came for.

他們的態度會趕走顧客，讓顧客更不想買到店內要買的產品。

But in luxury stores, Dahl found that the opposite was true.

但在精品店，Dahl 發現結果完全相反。

When customers went into a luxury store to buy something and the salesperson was exclusionary,

當顧客到精品店購物時，若店員很不友善，在當下反而會大大增加他們的購買慾。

they reported a much greater desire to purchase the product in the moment.

But in two weeks, their desire had significantly decreased.

但兩週後，他們的慾望就大幅下降。

But why is it that customers, who conventional wisdom says you should cater to, like being treated badly?

但依照一般常理而言，明明應該要被服務的顧客，為什麼會想要被這樣對待？

It's because of something called social exclusion.

原因是某個叫「社會排斥」的東西。

Basically, being in a group used to be key to survival

基本上，歸屬於團體是生存的關鍵，且團體對我們的情緒與心理健康也有很大的影響。

and it still is essential for our emotional and mental well-being.

Humans want to be in a group, especially one that is deemed more desirable.

人們喜歡有歸屬感，尤其是歸屬於那些外表光鮮亮麗的人。

The desire to purchase a product was influenced by the rejection of the group that you identified with.

人的購買慾會因被自身所認可的團體排斥所影響。

When you walk into a designer store you love and see those slick sales people chatting together,

當你走進喜愛的設計師商店，看到那些熟練圓滑的銷售員正在聊天，你會想要成為他們一員。

you want to be included.

And you'll buy a bag or sunglasses or 800-thread-count linen sheets to do it.

為了加入他們，你會買包包、太陽眼鏡，甚至是 800 紗織數的高密床單。

Dahl compares it to the popular group in high school: you want in.

Dahl 將此和高中的熱門社團做比較，你會想加入。

There are some conditions.

但有一些條件。

This effect only works when the salesperson is a good representation of the brand.

這個效應只有在店員很好地代表了該品牌時才有作用。

So a sloppily dressed employee doesn't quite cut it.

所以穿著邋遢的店員就不太管用了。

They have to be someone you identify with and whose rejection hurts.

那些人必須是你認同且若被他拒絕，你就會受傷的人。

Ma'am, do you have this in the next size up?

女士，有大一號的尺寸嗎？

Sorry, we only carry sizes 1, 3, and 5.

抱歉，我們只有 1 號、3 號跟 5 號。

You could try Sears.

妳可以去西爾斯買。

The brand also has to be aspirational.

品牌也得是有代表性的。

They have to be what Dahl calls "an ideal self concept."

它們得像是 Dahl 所稱的「理想自我概念」。

Like Louis Vuitton and Prada, are ideal self concepts of luxury.

像 Louis Vuitton 與 Prada，就是奢侈品界的理想自我概念。

Tesla would be the ideal self concept of sustainability.

特斯拉則是永續發展品牌的理想自我概念。

If the brand is accessible, people don't care about being a part of it, but when it's inaccessible⁠—

若那個品牌隨手可得，人們就不在乎成為它們的一員，但如果它們遙不可及...

I can afford it, don't worry.

我負擔得起，別擔心。

Look, we need to be ready for real customers, OK?

聽著，我們要服務的是真的會買東西的顧客，好嗎？

I'll take the bag. I'll take the bag right now.

我要買那個包包。我現在就買那個包包。

"Our study shows that you've got to be the right kind of snob in the right kind of store

Dahl 告訴《每日科學》：「我們的研究指出你得是對的臭臉加上處於對的商店才有用。」

for the effect to work," Dahl told Science Daily.

Something else that will make you more susceptible: self esteem.

另外一個容易讓你易受影響的是你的自尊。

The stronger your belief in your own identity,

Dahl 的研究指出，對自我認知越高，就越不會想把品牌當成認同自己的條件之一。

the less likely you'll feel the need to use the brand as your identity, according to Dahl's paper.

Um, that'll be $5,000.

嗯，這樣總共是 5,000 美元。

Do luxury stores do this on purpose?

名牌店會故意這樣做嗎？

Not that we could tell.

我們並不知道。

We couldn't find any indication that designer brands specifically requested that their employees be snobby.

我們找不到任何跡象說設計師品牌要求它們的店員要很勢利。

So, we don't know.

所以我們不能確定。

But since researchers found that improved impressions gained by rude treatment faded over time,

但既然研究者指出惡劣對待顧客而提升的印象會隨著時間而消逝，我們覺得把這個當是品牌銷售策略並不是個好點子。

we think that having that be your brand strategy would be a bad idea.

If you're shopping for a luxury item and are being treated rudely,

如果你在購買名牌時被惡劣對待，Dahl 建議你可以先離開商店等等再回來，或是直接網購避免與店員接觸。

Dahl suggests leaving and coming back later or avoiding the interaction altogether by shopping online.

So basically, give it time. Then you won't spend extra money trying to prove that "yeah, I am popular!"

基本上就是購買前三思，這樣你就不用多花錢來證明自己是受歡迎的。

Don't forget to like this video, click subscribe, and ring the bell for post notifications.

別忘了按讚、訂閱跟按下小鈴鐺來接收通知。

We'll see you next time.

我們下次見。