Table of contents

Glasses are functional accessories that have been around for centuries, with examples being found asearly as 12th century in China and North America. Nowadays consumers own more pairs of glasses(and sunglasses), wearing them for different occasions and thinking at them as an extension of their personality. In this new age, companies will be able to integrate technology with accessories, creating wearable technology like smart glasses; How will people react to this new amalgamation of existing products? Will their utilitarian aspects and use cases win over or will they be re-categorized and considered by their new characteristics?

1.1 Ray-Ban and Meta’s collaboration strategy
‍In 2021, Ray-Ban, the glasses firm owned by Luxottica, and Meta, the technology company, ended up collaborating and launching their first smart glasses, the Ray-Ban Stories. This strategy, which is known in the field of branding as ‘Masstige’, brings prestige for the mass brand (in this case Meta) by “borrowing” the luxury partner’s brand (Ray-Ban) image and values. Its purpose is not only improving both brands’ awareness and brands’ equity, but also potentially attracting new partners (Gammoh & Voss, 2013) (Mr ́oz-Gorgo ́n, 2016) and intensifies consumers’ trust and satisfaction (Hong et al., 2010). It is likely that Meta aimed to gain new, positive, extensive media attention and reach the final step in defining themselves as a more premium brand, while Ray-Ban aimed for more media exposure, increased sales volume, and reaching new customers.
‍
Ray-Ban Stories failed to convince consumers after very few months from launching. Nevertheless, Meta and Ray-Ban introduced a second and improved version of the product in October 2023, named ‘Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses’.
‍
1.2 Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses
The Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses launch boasts about advancements in technology as well as thedesign capabilities of the glasses. In fact, the intention of Meta and Ray-Ban was to create ‘smart glasses’ that can be integrated into the user’s everyday life.

1.2.1 'Smart’ features
‍This new version presents improved features of the previous one. Among the many we have: improved camera, with ultra-wide mode, able to capture photos and record up to 60 seconds videos of day-to-day moments from the consumer’s point of view allowing them to livestream directly to social media, a new battery that allows up to 36 hours of use and open-ear headphones capabilities. The newest key feature of this product, however, is its integration with Meta AI, a conversational assistant. Meta claims that users can interact with the glasses and get information about what they are looking at and talking with the glasses.

1.2.2 Design
‍Compared to the previous one, this version presents a new frame variant and especially new colour ways. The smart glasses come with 2 iconic Ray-Ban frames design - the Headliner and the Way fare - and a wide range of colours.

1.2.3 Aim of the product
‍Looking at the branding as well as the technology integrated in the product, it seems that Ray-Ban andMeta aim to create a disruptive innovation that will change the way people interact with social, digital and physical world. With this product, Meta wants to widen the gap between the previous attempts of smart glasses (Stories by Ray-Ban X Meta, Spectacles by Snap), used mainly for social network activities, by introducing new AI functionalities. However, due to the bulky influence of Ray-Ban and the difficulties of targeting this new product, seems unclear whether this strategy will be well communicated to the consumers.

In this report we analyse Meta x Ray-Ban's smart glasses through the product’s features and appearance as well as the branding and categorization strategies adopted by the two firms.

2.1 How are smart glasses supposed to interact with our lives
Different studies performed on consumers indicate two main factors that influence consumer’s acceptance of smart devices and clothing (Hwang et al.,2009) (Ju et al., 2020) (Adapa et al., 2017). Those acceptance variables are ‘Perceived usefulness’ and 'Perceived aesthetics’.

2.1.1 Perceived usefulness
Perceived usefulness is considered the strongest predictor of consumer’s attitude and it’s influenced by other variables like perceived comfort, perceived compatibility and perceived ease of use (Hwang et al.,2009) and some researchers also suggests that it also influences users’ perception of the monetary value of the product (Adapa et al., 2017). Different visual models were designed to show the impact of perceived usefulness on consumer’s acceptance. Figure E shows the Technological Acceptance Model TAM (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989), which is considered the most validate to explain the acceptance and usage intention for digital devices and information technology (Alsharhan et al., 2022).‍

For smart devices like Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses, perceived usefulness is mainly influenced by product functionalities and compatibility, which can be intended with other devices but also with users’ lifestyle (Adapa et al., 2017). Together, those aspects offer to the consumer a comparative benefit. (Ju et al., 2020). Ease of use, on the other hand, is less likely to be a pivotal factor, as consumers generally regard smart clothing, especially smart glasses, as user-friendly devices (Hwang et al., 2009) (Adapa et al., 2017).
‍
With their release, Meta’s smart glasses lacked comparative advantage to existing technologies. Despite being a quicker and easier tool for reaching AI assistant, listening to music and capturing pictures, all those features can be perceived by the users as replacements of smartphones and other devices, which make the product not indispensable. In addition, not enough information was communicated about product’s impact on consumer’s lifestyle. This ends up in users not visualizing occasions in which the product could be used and needs that it could solve. For these reasons, consumer’s attitude towards the product will be very low, as much as it happened with the previous version of the product.

2.1.2 Perceived aesthetics
Perceived aesthetic attributes significantly influence attitude toward purchasing smart clothing and smart devices. Studies suggest that firms and designers should consider both compatibility with fashion styles and distinctiveness of the form to stimulate consumer’s fashion sense (Hwang et al.,2009). In his study about forms of product, Bloch (1983) shows how situational variables moderate both psychological and behavioural responses to product form.
‍
The product was launched with two iconic Ray-Ban variants, one more than the previous model. It is likely that Meta wanted to make the product being perceived as more personalized and user-centred, intended to fit seamlessly into the user's routine instead of being a gimmicky tool that just connects to social media or has no substantial use beyond aesthetics. As suggested by Boch (1983), providing more frames could help adapting to the different tastes of consumer. However, offering old-styled frames compromises the strategy of the companies, who are trying to sell the product as a radical innovation keeping the style of well recognizable existing products. To prompt technological advancement, Mugge et al. (2017) suggests a novel and nonnatural appearances for the devices. This strategy can be seen for example in a variant of Ray-Ban and Meta Smart Glasses, which shows the chip inside the sunglasses thanks to a semi-transparent plastic. With this being a good starting point, the companies should demonstrate bravery in suggesting more alternative solutions capable of adapting to consumer tastes and prompt positive technologic response.

Smart devices differ from general products as they can be considered by individuals as accessorizes and for this reason, extensions of their personalities. This makes it more difficult for the firms to predict consumer characteristics and innate design preferences. However, the important role in the social context of Meta and Ray-Ban gives them margin to work in the social and cultural sphere.
‍
2.2 Target and Categorization
In their paper, Rauschnabel et al (2016) discuss how augmented reality (AR) smart glasses are not just limited to their utilitarian use. In their study, they propose three types of consumers who buy these products: technologists, fashionists and “fashionologists”. Technologists base their decision predominantly on utilitarian benefits. They are the ones who are more enthusiastic about new product features and functionalities on the glasses. Fashionists on the other hand are people who buy and use smart glasses as a social cue and their adoption decisions are mostly driven by factors that incorporate other people. As smart glasses are quite visible to others, fashionists observe this visibility as the main purpose of the glasses and want to use them as a social cue while interacting with other people. Fashionoligsts are those people who want to use the features offered by the glasses in their daily life but at the same time want the glasses to look good. Their purchase decision is driven by both technical and social factors.
‍
The Ray-Ban x Meta glasses seem to be targeting the fashionologists and fashionists with their design. The glasses have been made to resemble the classic style of sunglasses and the ‘smart’ features are subtly displayed. To the untrained eye, the product may pass off as ordinary sunglasses. This is probably a result of their categorization strategy and what the company wants consumers to associate the product with. Mugge and Dahl (2013) in their research paper on ideal level of design newness discuss how the design of the product plays an important role in facilitating the introduction strategy for a new product. Companies pursue one of two introduction approaches: product differentiation and subtyping (Sujan and Bettman, 1989). Product differentiation suggests that the company launches the product as a part of an existing category and the design of the product also communicates that. This makes it easy for the consumer to associate the product as a new innovative product within an existing category of products. Meanwhile by doing subtyping, the product is set apart from the general category as the company doesn’t want it to be associated with the existing categories. This is done by radically new designs as this reduces the likelihood that consumers will compare it to products within the same category (Mugge and Dahl, 2013). In the case of Ray-Ban x Meta glasses, the product's design closely resembles that of regular sunglasses. This approach of product differentiation suggests their intention to avoid any negative associations and provide a sense of familiarity to consumers. This choice may stem from companies being mindful of the mixed reactions elicited by Google's smart glasses in 2014, and their desire to steer clear of a similar response for this product. However, the marketing of the product appears to convey a different message. We will delve into this further in the following section, examining how the product is being marketed to establish itself as a distinct category.
‍
2.3 Marketing and branding
2.3.1 Companies struggle in branding the collaboration
Ray-Ban and Meta are two separate companies that are implementing co-branding. Collaboration and partnership of two brands by co-branding, conveys a new image and new attributes are added to the products under the collaboration (Waters, 1997; Ilicic & Webster, 2013; Nasution et al., 2020). In their paper Shan et al. (2022) discuss how co-branding can create positive brand associations and higher perceived value by creating a sense of fit between the original brand and the co-branded product, giving consumers a reason to buy the product. However, it can also harm the brand image of either or both the brands if there is any interference between the two of them or the audience don’t see a fit between both brands. Companies often use co-branding when they want to release a new product but either the brand image is not in line with the launch, or the company is not a well-known brand in that category. In the case of Ray-Ban and Meta, both are well established brands in eye wear and tech industry respectively and thus chose to collaborate for the smart glasses. Being that the companies are both from different industries and viewed as different levels of brands in terms of ‘quality’, their co-branding connection might result in a low product category fit and a low brand personality fit (Shan et al., 2022). Meta being a technology focused company without strong brand image around trust and no association with fashion, juxtaposed with Ray-Ban's long history of quality and iconic products in the sunglasses space lends itself to the fact that this collaboration will have a low fit when looking at the two brands. In terms of low product category, wearable technology is a relatively new product space which is currently dominated by smart watches. The smart glasses space has not been broken into yet and the previous attempts at doing so have failed for various reasons. The product category is a tricky one to get right and from a consumer standpoint it is not something that inspires confidence in a user (Ju et al., 2020).
‍
Entering a co-branding partnership becomes challenging when consumers can't easily relate to the purpose of collaboration. Furthermore, the product resulting from this partnership merges two unconventional categories. This novel product category may create confusion for consumers who struggle to evaluate it in the absence of comparable products in the market (Shan et al., 2022).

2.3.2 Branding innovation in the wrong way
Both low fits in brand personality and product category have forced Ray-Ban and Meta to push the novelty of their product to gain a steady consumer base. The Ray Ban x Meta Smart Glasses are marketed as Smart Glasses which are intended to counteract how the glasses are visually perceived, and to emphasize the technological innovation that are within the glasses, for the purpose of making them novel in the eye of the consumer. The marketing focuses on the technological advancements of the product instead of the sunglasses angle. This can be seen in the naming of the product, which emphasizes both angles of the product and trying to get the product out of the force fitting that they didn’t intend.

However, the product itself appears to be ordinary Ray-Ban sunglasses, consistent with what the company has been making for years. This seems to create a disconnection between the products appearance and the company's intended double categorization. Because of the single category belief,Ray Ban and Meta must work double time to remove any stigma and beliefs that comes with the first thing users see, which in this case would be the glasses (Rajagopal & Burnkrant, 2009).

Based on the previous analysis of the Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses, the following key insights and recommendations can be drawn:
‍
3.1 Sub-Branding for conveying innovation
‍The co-branding partnership represents a bold move, merging two distinct brands with different quality perceptions and entering a relatively uncharted product category. A way in which Ray-Ban and Meta can brand and market this collaboration (and the way they have seemingly been trying to implement) is by pushing for it to be thought of as a radical new product space. Branding their collaboration and product as innovative will break consumers out of their traditional thought processes when it comes to co-branding techniques (Shan et al., 2022). Consumer will then start to think out of the box when it comes to the co-branding scenario, and “since novel stimuli are unexpected, they generate a more significant response than previously recognized stimuli” (Shan et al., 2022), which will Allow Ray-Ban and Meta to push past their undesirable brand and category connection.
‍
Given the popularity of both brands, the concept of novelty can be better communicated through the creation of an effective sub-brand. This sub-brand should not only inherit the core values of both parent brands but also convey its own unique set of values. It would allow them to focus on disruptive innovation without feeling like the departure from their respective brand identities will be damaged by this new venture. This approach allows Ray-Ban and Meta to preserve the positive attributes of their respective brand identities while infusing the collaboration with a fresh and distinctive identity, enhancing consumer perception and acceptance.

3.2 Targeting Technologists
It is evident that the smart glasses have been strategically designed to blend seamlessly with classic sunglasses, perhaps with a nod to mitigating the mixed reactions Google's smart glasses faced upon their release. While this approach maintains a sense of familiarity and avoids negative associations, it also presents an opportunity for refinement.
‍
Meta's vision aligns closely with the ideals and preferences of technologists who are enthusiastic about cutting-edge features and functionalities. To better cater to this target audience and reinforce Meta's technological focus, a recommendation would be to implement new designs that incorporate advanced, innovative elements. For example, Ray-Ban and Meta have already introduced the function of Meta AI, a recommendation would be to focus on pushing that feature to the next stage, which will allow technologists to invest more into the product and its capabilities. Focusing on improving the Meta AI feature into that of a reliable AR feature would push the product into a new category and product fit, thus attracting a new set of consumers and falling in line with the new sub-branding recommendation as well. By embracing novel designs that emphasize the glasses' high-tech capabilities, Meta can enhance its appeal to the technologist segment of consumers.
‍
3.3 Features and Appearance
To succeed in appealing consumers, Ray-Ban and Meta must prioritize enhancing perceived usefulness with innovative features, focusing on battery life, sound quality, and seamless tech integration while effectively communicating value. Additionally, they should ensure compatibility with existing and future consumer devices. Finally, they must enhance design appeal with distinct, fashion-compatible, and unconventional aesthetics, to cultivate positive perceptions of technological advancement and broaden the consumer appeal. In tandem with creating a sub-brand, they need to put in the work to design products that reflect the separation from the original brands, justifying both the products existence and the collaboration. The features as well as appearance need to reflect a certain level design newness. As mentioned previously, a way of approaching this could be creating an ecosystem around the AI capabilities within the smart glasses, enhancing that specific functionality as a core part of the design and the intention, setting Ray-Ban and Meta Smart Glasses apart.

Additionally, the current product only has two distinct design options both based on existing Ray-Ban glasses (that feature multiple colourways). This is corralling them into a space where they can’t break away being force-fit as primarily Ray-Ban glasses. The collaboration needs to emphasize its novelty and have an appearance that reflects that and intends to put the brand as well as the industry into the future of smart wearables. Pushing new design and more potential personalization in more ways than just colours and two frame designs needs to be revisited. The appearance shouldn’t resemble traditional glasses and especially ones that are as ubiquitous as Ray-Bans, it should use the core values and design techniques mastered by the brand to innovate and create a new vision for the future.

3.4 Conclusion
Ray-Ban x Meta Smart Glasses have the potential to cater to a diverse audience than what was previously designed. Their success hinges on effectively addressing the right users and communicating the right values and features. Their design strategy and marketing approach should strike an innovative categorization and put aside the idea of coexisting with normal sunglasses. By staying true to their innovative features and focusing on aesthetics, these smart glasses can carve out a distinct niche in the evolving market for wearable technology.
‍