eComID’s Three-Lever Approach to Changing Consumer Behavior at Scale

eComID’s Three-Lever Approach to Changing Consumer Behavior at Scale

You can’t make people shop differently. You can restrict their choices, punish bad behavior, or create so much friction that they give up. But none of those approaches build a sustainable business or change culture at scale.

In a recent episode of Category Visionaries, Oscar Rundqvist, CEO and Co-Founder of eComID, explained how they’re tackling one of fashion e-commerce’s hardest problems: changing consumer behavior without creating resistance. When “54% of all dresses that was bought online in Europe last year were returned,” the temptation is to crack down. eComID chose a different path.

The Behavior Change Problem

The returns crisis in fashion e-commerce isn’t just about logistics or policies. It’s fundamentally a behavior problem that got locked in during the pandemic. “During the pandemic, amount of return was almost like, free doubled in the US,” Oscar notes. But it wasn’t just volume that changed. It was how people shop.

“The customer behavior back then changed because the physical selling, like, got completely out of the way,” Oscar explains. “So brands needed to compensate with that to really accelerate online selling. And I think that led to a quite irresponsible shopping behavior online, and that had now got stuck.”

The behavior that “got stuck” is what Oscar calls “bracketing.” “Customers are shopping in a way they’re bracketing, meaning that they buy the same products in multiple sizes, et cetera, which has led to return rates often up around 50%.”

This creates a vicious cycle. Brands can’t eliminate generous return policies without damaging conversion rates. But maintaining those policies enables behavior that’s environmentally destructive and economically unsustainable. Force customers to change and you lose them. Don’t force change and the problem compounds.

Lever One: Green Nudging

eComID’s first lever is what Oscar calls “green nudging.” Rather than restricting choice, they make the environmental impact of returns visible within the shopping experience. “We in the brands experiences, we nudge the customers and inform them, educate them about the environmental impact of returns,” Oscar explains.

The beauty of this approach is that it doesn’t prevent anyone from doing anything. It adds information that was previously invisible. Customers already care about sustainability. They just don’t connect their bracketing behavior to environmental harm.

The results validate the approach. “We’ve seen studies that just doing this can lead to like a more than 2% decrease in returns and not affecting revenue,” Oscar says. That’s the critical phrase: “not affecting revenue.” The nudge changes behavior without creating friction that damages conversion.

This works because it aligns with existing values rather than imposing new ones. The behavior change becomes self-directed rather than externally imposed.

Lever Two: Dynamic Incentives

The second lever introduces consequences that feel fair rather than punitive. “We create different kind of incentives for customers with the brands we work with,” Oscar explains. “For example, that return policies can change depending on how much return.”

Here’s how it works: “So that if you’re like, not returning a lot and shopping in a responsible way, you will get better return policies than customers that are returning in a not so responsible way.”

This inverts the typical approach to behavior change. Instead of punishing bad behavior, it rewards good behavior. Instead of restricting everyone, it creates tiers based on actual behavior.

The psychological difference matters. When you restrict everyone’s return window universally, customers feel punished for others’ behavior. When you give better policies to responsible shoppers, customers who bracket feel they’re missing out on rewards. That’s a fundamentally different emotional response.

This approach also solves the brand’s dilemma. They’re not taking away benefits from all customers. They’re creating a system where behavior determines benefit level. The policy becomes defensible rather than customer-hostile.

Lever Three: Intelligent Guidance

The third lever addresses a root cause of returns: customers genuinely don’t know what size to order. “Sizes is different between two brands,” Oscar notes. “Like, one medium in one brand could be small in other brands.”

eComID’s solution uses historical data to guide future purchases. If a customer bought pants in one size and returned them, then bought another pair in a different size and kept them, the system remembers and can recommend the size that worked.

This is behavior change through removing the need for the problematic behavior. Customers bracket because they’re uncertain. Remove the uncertainty, and the bracketing becomes unnecessary.

This approach scales in ways that manual customer service can’t. Every purchase and return creates data that improves recommendations.

Why Three Levers Beat One

The genius in eComID’s approach isn’t any single lever. It’s the combination. Each addresses a different psychological driver of returns behavior.

Green nudging addresses the awareness gap. Customers who bracket don’t see the connection between their behavior and environmental harm. Make it visible, and some percentage self-correct.

Dynamic incentives address the motivation gap. Even customers who understand the impact might continue bracketing if there’s no personal consequence. Create a reward structure, and behavior change becomes self-interested.

Intelligent guidance addresses the capability gap. Some customers want to shop responsibly but genuinely don’t know their size. Give them better information, and they don’t need to bracket.

Together, these levers catch customers at different stages of behavior change. Some respond to information. Some respond to incentives. Some just need better tools.

The Future: Making Responsibility Aspirational

Oscar’s vision extends the incentive model into something more powerful: social currency. “We want to make it cool to shop in a responsible way and we want to make it rewarding,” he explains.

The company is exploring gamification where responsible shopping unlocks exclusive access. “Gamification aspects where responsible shopping, low return rates is rewarded by, let’s say, early access to new collections or invitations to cool fashion events, etcetera.”

This adds a social dimension. “Imagine if the kids could compare the return rates and the ones with low return rates would encourage in a way,” Oscar suggests.

When low return rates become a status symbol, behavior change accelerates. You’re not just appealing to environmental consciousness. You’re tapping into social dynamics and identity.

The Principle for Behavior Change Products

Strip away the specifics, and you find a framework that applies to any product trying to change behavior at scale: you need multiple levers addressing different barriers to change.

Information alone rarely changes behavior. Incentives alone feel manipulative. Better tools alone don’t address motivation. But combine all three, and you create multiple paths to the same outcome.

Oscar’s approach demonstrates that sustainable behavior change requires understanding why people act the way they do, then systematically removing barriers and adding motivators at multiple levels. The goal isn’t forcing change through restriction. It’s making the desired behavior the easiest, most rewarding, and most socially valued option.