Every year, right around Thanksgiving time, we are flooded with a slew of new products that enter the market in time for the holiday shopping season; this is especially true in the high technology area. Oftentimes it seems many of these products are just the latest version of a similar product that was released just a few months prior.

With all the choices in the market, consumers essentially experience information overload. It is hard for consumers to figure out whether or not the newest product is really the “latest and greatest” and whether they should spend the money on this version of a product that they already own and seems to work just fine. The reaction of the consumer is seen as a new trend in our society; it has been coined by a recent New York Times article as “global gadget fatigue.”

The nonprofit group, Underwriters Laboratories, conducted a study that examined high technology in depth across the United States, China, Germany and India. It was based on interviews with 1,200 consumers and 1,200 manufacturers and examined the mindset of both groups around products that are now produced globally, some requiring the involvement of 35 manufacturers to produce a single product. One of the key findings of the study showed that 48% of consumers felt that “high-tech manufacturers bring new products to market faster than people need them.”

The juxtaposition between innovation and product introduction can be interpreted in two ways that represent a somewhat paradoxical combination. Some feel the influx of newer versions of products is due to innovation happening too quickly. A new product is introduced every time there is a new development in the technology. However, the opposite viewpoint can be seen as well, that innovation is happening too slowly. New products are introduced rapidly due to marketing timelines or business plans and are simply “me-too products,” with little or insignificant changes to the product. Thus, there is both too much and too little innovation.

In America especially, manufacturers feel that the speed to market is more important for products than other factors. This attitude results in manufacturers creating products at the expense of product performance, which is evident when new products have a lot of bugs and issues in the first few weeks of release. Another drawback is that people can never really understand or become proficient with a new device or new software if it is too rapidly replaced by the next version.

Business and marketing strategies tend to play a huge role in corporate actions as well. An example is the business strategy of planned obsolescence, in which the obsolescence (becoming unfashionable or no longer usable) of a product is planned and built into it from its conception. Applied to high technology products, a consumer will feel pressure to purchase a new product if he knows that the current one will be discontinued. But as evidenced, this can lead to consumer resistance and “global gadget fatigue” if products are introduced too quickly.

Manufacturers are not totally to blame. There is a small percentage of consumers who are “gadget junkies” and must have the most up-to-date, cutting edge version of a gadget, replacing their current perfectly good device. Also, a high number of manufacturers believe consumers are well informed about new innovations in gadgets and buy according to informed decisions.

In the future, companies need to assess what consumers really want. It appears consumers are more concerned about the traceability of products and parts and product safety over rapid innovation from the study. More studies like the Underwriters Laboratories one and similar surveys are useful in collecting the majority mindset. Companies also need to track trends in innovation and determine which features of a product most need research and development and whether a whole new device must be created. Before introducing a new gadget, companies should ensure that significant testing is done so the product is reliable.

I feel the majority of the population looks to gadgets to be developed enough to work dependably for their purpose. According to readers’ comments to the NY Times article, the general voice is that manufacturers should not be slaves to marketing schedules and should introduce products only when there is new value and a significant improvement over the previous version. Companies such as Samsung and Apple have adopted a strategy along these lines: to release a flagship product once a year and one or two lower budget or different versions. A smarter strategy can only result in customer loyalty, good brand reputation and positive profits for companies and consumers satisfied with the gadget they willingly choose to purchase.