NFHS reports that fewer women decide how to spend the money they earn now than they were 15 years ago

NFHS reports that fewer women decide how to spend the money they earn now than they were 15 years ago.

Women are becoming the driving force behind the global economy. They already influence nearly $20 trillion in yearly consumer spending throughout the world, with that amount expected to rise to $28 trillion in the next five years. Their total annual revenues of $13 trillion probably rise to $18 trillion in the same period. Women represent a larger growth market than China and India combined—in fact, more than twice as large. Given those figures, it would be a mistake to ignore or undervalue the female customer.

Despite this, many companies do just that, even if they believe they have a great approach to women.
Women’s financial independence may not always follow by having a job. It is not uncommon for male family members — whether a father or a spouse – to be in charge of financial choices, even when women generate the money. According to the National Family Health Survey, fewer women are making decisions about their own income now than they were fifteen years ago. A higher percentage of them are doing it jointly with their spouses (NFHS).

Fewer women have control over how they spend their money.
The couple, rather than the woman, is increasingly making decisions on how a wife’s salary is spent.
According to the poll, one out of every six married women with a source of income believes they have no choice in how their earnings are spent.
Fewer married women are making decisions about how they should spend their wages on their own now than they were 15 years ago, and a growing number of them are doing so jointly with their spouses.

At the same time, figures from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) show that one out of every six married women with an income has no say in how their wages are spent, a percentage that has been stable for the last 15 years. Men continue to make decisions in such situations.

When swarms of women left the employment at the same time, the percentage of women making autonomous decisions about how to use their earnings fell.
According to the national report of the most recent round of the NFHS, or the fifth round performed between 2019 and 2021, just approximately 18 percent of married women with an income were making autonomous decisions about how to spend their money.

That figure was 24 percent in the third phase of the survey, which took place in 2005-06. The number of women who reported these decisions was made jointly with their spouses grew by 10 percentage points to 67 percent during the same time period.
Married women aged 15 to 49 years old were anticipated to be employed at 43% in the 2005-06 cycle of the research. That percentage had reduced to 32% during the fifth round, which was somewhat better than the 31% reported in 2015-16.

In both urban and rural India, and among persons with varying levels of education, the percetnageof married women who select how their salaries are spent has fallen. Only the wealthiest women defied the trend, with the percentage of these women making their own purchases dropping somewhat.

Men’s remuneration is the subject of a decision.

Compared to 15 years before, a higher percentage of women said that decisions about how men’s salaries were spent were decided jointly. In 2005-06, 62 percent of women said these decisions were made together; now, 71 percent said they were made jointly. Furthermore, from 25% in 2005-06 to 21% in 2019-21, the percentage of women who believe their partners made the decision for them has declined somewhat. Only around 6% of married women believe they have influence over how their husbands’ money is spent.

There was no difference between the two rounds of the study when the males were given the identical issue – who chose how their salaries were spent. The percentage of those who claimed choices were made collaboratively remained nearly steady at 66 percent. In both rounds, the percentage of males who stated they alone chose how their money was spent was about 28%, which was higher than the percentage of women who said they did. This suggests that many men were either hesitant to admit that shared decisions were made or that women were encouraged to feel they had a voice in how their husband’s income was spent.

The percentage of males who indicated their spouses chose how their income was spent independently increased from 2% to 6%.

Purchasing choices

The major change in women’s participation in decision-making was noticed when large household expenditures were made. Men were making less independent judgments. As a consequence, from 44 percent in 2005-06 to 72 percent in 2019-21, the share of houses where the husband and wife made the decision together has grown. The percentage of men who made a choice on their own has reduced by half since 2005-06.

Men were asked how they felt about their spouses’ decision-making involvement. The number of men who feel that women should decide how they spend their salaries has dropped from 20% to roughly 18% during the last 15 years, while the percentage of men who believe that the husband should decide has climbed by two percentage points. The great majority of guys wanted to make decisions together.

Only around a quarter of men wanted to let their wives make big home purchases (less than 10%), while more than a fourth wanted to make a choice themselves. The percentage of males who believe such choices should be made jointly has dropped by around 5% to 63 percent.

Men now want more influence in buying daily home necessities than they did 15 years ago. In 2005-06, just 40% of respondents wanted these choices to be made jointly, compared to 54% in 2005-06. As a result, the percentage of women who believe their spouses should make such decisions on their own dropped from 37% to 25%.

Women’s role in the economy

Women are becoming the driving force behind the global economy.
They already influence nearly $20 trillion in yearly consumer spending throughout the world, with that amount expected to rise to $28 trillion in the next five years. Their total annual revenues of $13 trillion might rise to $18 trillion in the same time span. Women represent a growth market that is larger than China and India combined—in fact, more than twice as large. Given those figures, it would be a mistake to overlook or undervalue the female customer. Despite this, many organizations do just that, even if they believe they have a great approach to women.

Consider Dell’s brief foray into marketing laptops to women. With the introduction of its Della website in May 2009, the firm fell victim to the conventional “make it pink” mentality. Colors, computer accessories, calorie counting, and recipe-finding recommendations were all highlighted on the site. Women were outraged, calling it “slick yet disturbing” and “condescending.” The company’s “very unique webpage for women” drew a fast response from the blogosphere.

“If you believed computer purchasing was a gender-neutral affair, then you’ve obviously been struck down by an extreme case of feminine hysteria,” Austin Modine of the online tech journal The Register replied angrily.

(Nine out of 10 doctors from the Victorian era agree.)” According to the New York Times, Dell had to attend the “school of marketing hard knocks.” The corporation changed the site’s name and purpose just weeks after it launched. Dell informed consumers, “You spoke, and we listened.” While Dell deserves credit for quickly changing course, why didn’t its marketing spot the potentially problematic posture before the launch?

When it comes to selling to women, most businesses have a lot to learn. In 2008, the Boston Consulting Group conducted detailed research on how women felt about their employment and lifestyles, as well as how businesses were serving them. There was a lot of space for improvement, as it turned out. Our poll received responses from over 12,000 women from more than 40 countries, representing a wide range of economic levels and walks of life.

They answered 120 questions on their education and finances, homes and possessions, jobs and careers, activities and interests, relationships, hopes and anxieties, and shopping activity and spending patterns in almost three dozen categories of products and services, frequently with disarming candor.

In a nutshell, this is what we found: Women are underserved in a significant way. Despite their significant gains in market power and social status over the last century, they appear to be undervalued in the marketplace and devalued at work. They are overworked and manage competing responsibilities such as job, home, and family. Few businesses have reacted to their need for time-saving solutions as well as products and services tailored to their needs.

It’s still difficult for women to locate a good pair of jeans, purchase a nutritious meal, seek financial counsel without feeling patronized, or find the time to exercise. Despite the fact that women control the majority of consumer spending, too many firms act as though they have no input in purchasing decisions. Companies continue to sell them poorly designed products and services, as well as antiquated marketing narratives that reinforce preconceptions about women.

Take a look at the car business. Cars are built for speed, not usefulness, which is what women care about. No SUV is designed to accommodate a woman who must transport two little children.

Consider a recent Bounty paper towel commercial in which a husband and son stand by watching a spill span the room until Mom arrives and joyfully cleans up the mess.
Meanwhile, women are acquiring more clout in the workplace. As of this writing, the number of working women in the United States is about to surpass that of working males. Men account for three-quarters of those who have lost their employment as a result of the present crisis.

To be honest, women are still paid less than males on average and are more likely to work part-time—factors that have served to protect them from the problem. Nonetheless, we believe that once the crisis eases, women will offer not just one of the greatest business possibilities in the world but also one of the largest market opportunities in history.

Where Can You Find Opportunities?

Although each person’s experience is unique, we discovered six general archetypes among our responders when we searched for commonalities in our data. Fast-tracker, pressure cooker, relationship-centered, managing on her own, contented empty nester, and making ends meet are some of these characteristics, which are generally determined by income, age, and stage of life.

There aren’t many ladies who fit into just one category. Married fast-trackers with children, for example, are likely to fall into the pressure cooker group at some time in their life.

Despite its limits, segmentation may aid in the creation and marketing of a company’s products. Knowing who you’re aiming for and what she’s looking for in the market might give you a huge leg up.

Any firm would be prudent to seek female clients, but six industries have the most promise. Food, fitness, beauty, and fashion are the four industries where women are most willing to spend more or trade up. The other two industries are financial services and health care, both of which women have expressed strong unhappiness.

One of the most significant opportunities is food. Grocery shopping and meal preparation are primarily carried out by women. Food is also one of the most crucial budget items for customers, one that may be reduced but never completely removed.

Whole Foods and Tesco were among the ladies we polled’s, favorite grocery retailers. Despite appealing to diverse demographics, both restaurants have built a dedicated following. Despite its high pricing, Whole Foods has flourished by catering to the demanding (but well-heeled) fast-trackers who seek top-quality meats and produce as well as skilled employees. Tesco shops, which provide one-stop shopping for a wide range of home supplies, such as books, furniture, and financial services, appeal to time-crunched pressure cooks.

Fitness is also a lucrative industry. Diet food sales in the United States have been expanding at a rate of 6% to 9% per year and are now worth over $10 billion, with a global industry worth around $20 billion. The health club sector in the United States generates roughly $14 billion in yearly sales.

About two-thirds of those who responded to our poll said they were overweight; what was once a purely American problem has now become a global phenomenon. While women claim that exercise is important to them, in fact, it often takes a back place. When asked to rank the needs of their spouses, children, parents, and oneself in order of importance, virtually all women put their personal needs second or third, indicating that they have difficulty finding time to exercise.

Companies face a hurdle in making exercise more accessible to women. Most health clubs, for example, are pricey and geared toward guys. They are oriented toward bodybuilders and often seem more like nightclubs than workout gyms. Women, on the whole, are more interested in losing weight, improving their cardiovascular health, and toning up than they are in pumping themselves up. Bright lights, electronic music, sweaty guys, and sophisticated equipment are all turned off by most people.

Curves, a fitness business, identified and addressed women’s issues, and as a result, it flourished swiftly. Curves offer a straightforward concept: low-cost, quick workout for women alone, with no-frills settings geared to a middle-aged clientele of average build. There’s no need to hire a trainer because helpers are on hand to guide them through a basic 30-minute circuit.

Women’s emotional well-being is enhanced by beauty goods and services. Those we spoke with who spent a greater percentage of their income on cosmetics felt more fulfilled, successful, and strong; they also reported less stress while working longer hours.

Nonetheless, women are unsatisfied with beauty products in general, and the way the business is changing prevents them from spending as much as they would want. For starters, there are too many options; it’s a male-dominated sector where males make educated assumptions about what women want, and things arrive and go at a breakneck rate. Women are enthusiastic about the sector and are highly represented in entry-level positions, but female employment at the executive and senior leadership levels are declining.

Putting more women at the top, where they can help make crucial choices and offer feedback on what resonates with customers, might be a smart starting step toward winning market share.

Many successful cosmetic enterprises have made innovative use of new technology to meet women’s need to seem younger. For example, facial skin-care products have grown to be a $20 billion industry globally. Previously, stores were loaded with products whose main aim was to hydrate the skin; now, formulations with a range of advantages, including UV protection, skin-plumping, and capillary strengthening, are available, all with the goal of preventing, or at the very least masking, aging.

The top of the line is La Prairie’s Cellular Cream Platinum Rare antiaging moisturizer, which costs $1,000 for 1.7 ounces and is made in Switzerland. The lotion contains a trace of platinum, which “recharges the skin’s electrical equilibrium and preserves the skin’s DNA,” according to the manufacturer.

When the cream was first debuted in 2008, buyers queued up in front of luxury retail outlets to get a jar, despite the high price.

Procter & Gamble’s Olay brand, on the other hand, is accessible at drugstores. It has evolved from a single low-cost product with a single purpose (moisturizing) used by around 2% of the population to a plethora of higher-end goods with a wide range of applications and a 40% home penetration. The Regenerist Daily Regenerating Serum, marketed as the “next best thing to cosmetic surgery,” is one of Olay’s most popular new products.

Apparel, which includes accessories and shoes, is a $47 billion worldwide business that has a lot of opportunity for improvement, especially in terms of fit and price.

The majority of women aren’t a flawless size 6, and they don’t enjoy being reminded of this every time they go shopping. Trying on clothes is frequently a frustrating experience that only serves to reinforce women’s negative body perceptions. The Banana Republic, a popular shop among the women in our poll, has built a dedicated following by addressing the issue of fit, notably in pants. It comes in a number of cuts to accommodate different body types, and the sizes are constant throughout. You may buy many pairs of pants once you’ve discovered your “fit block” (the chain’s technical word for body type).

Multiple pairs of pants may be purchased swiftly and reliably, even online. The Banana Republic is Gap’s most profitable brand, and it’s the only one that’s increased in the last five years.

Express, on the other hand, concentrated on design and color but failed to produce a consistent fit. Women may try on four clothes labeled “size 8,” but which were actually sizes 6 to 12. The chain’s revenues continued to trail so badly that its parent company, Limited Brands, decided to abandon the fashion clothing market in 2007, selling Express to a private equity firm.

Another source of dissatisfaction for the ladies in our poll was the high expense of apparel. That explains why H&M, located in Sweden, was also chosen by respondents. Its boutiques provide low-cost, exciting, stylish clothing, as well as a sense of surprise each time customers visit due to a quick turnover of goods. Women like being able to purchase a new wardrobe without breaking their wallets. The fact that roughly 80% of H&M’s employees, 77 percent of store managers, and 44 percent of country managers are women may have contributed to the company’s success. Seven of the eleven members of the board are as well.

During our investigation, we found that few of the ladies we spoke with had any need for new apparel. Most people could get by by only shopping once or twice a year to replace their essentials. Given that women are prepared to spend extra for clothing that fits them well, producers and retailers may discover a lot of untapped potential in the garment industry if they pay attention to what women want and explore innovative technologies that enhance construction, color, and comfort, and fit.

Financial services take the award for being the business most hostile to women—and the one in which firms stand to benefit the most if they can reform their ways.

Despite economic setbacks, private wealth in the United States is anticipated to rise from $14 trillion now to $22 trillion by 2020, with women controlling half of it. Despite this, financial organizations that assume males are their target clients continue to disappoint women down in terms of quality and service.

Our poll participants were harsh in their criticisms of financial institutions. They highlighted a lack of respect, bad guidance, conflicting laws, one-size-fits-all forms, and an unending tangle of red tape that exhausts and irritates them. Consider the following excerpts from our interviews:

• “I despise being categorized based on my gender or age, and I don’t enjoy being treated like a baby.”

• “As a single woman, I often get the impression that financial institutions aren’t interested in doing business with me.”

• “Financial service representatives speak down to women as though we don’t know more than the essentials.”

• “I make close to $1 million a year and expect to retire with $20 million or more in assets. Therefore I’m not a good fit for a bargain broker or suited for high-end wealth management.”

A disgruntled client with $20 million or more to invest in a gold mine. Overall, the investing and life insurance markets for women are wide open. (See the exhibit “Financial Categories Where Untapped Sales to Women Are Worth Trillions” for three of the major potential.)

Women in our poll, particularly middle-aged women, expressed dissatisfaction with health treatment. Women were overwhelmingly dissatisfied with their hospitals and doctors.

When asked if their general practitioners and specialists could perform “slightly better” or “substantially better,” more than 60% answered that doctors could do “somewhat better” or “significantly better.” General practitioners were unsatisfied with 71% of women aged 30 to 49, while specialists were dissatisfied with 68 percent of the same group. They were annoyed by the amount of time they had to wait for physicians and test results, as well as the time they had to schedule and keep appointments for themselves and their families. To make matters worse, women pay substantially more for health insurance than males.

Again, firms that cater to women have a lot of potentials. When we looked inside our respondents’ medical cabinets, we nearly always found Johnson & Johnson (in the form of oral contraceptives, infant care, bandages, and other goods), despite the fact that it is not a health care service provider. The firm invests 4% of its revenue on consumer research and development, which is more than double the industry average, and so has a greater grasp of its female customers than the majority of its competitors. For example, the business undertook clinical research in collaboration with a pediatric sleep expert at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia since moms of small children are one of its most significant consumer groups.

They came up with a three-step practice consisting of a bath, massage, and quiet time to help newborns sleep better. J&J then released a range of goods to supplement the regimen, using the clinical study’s findings to bolster their legitimacy.

Overworked and overburdened

Given how frequently the problem of time—or a lack thereof—arose in our survey and interviews, providing easier and more convenient ways to make purchases would provide an obvious benefit in all of the businesses we’ve addressed. Women, we’ve seen, don’t devote enough time to themselves.

They are still significantly more burdened by domestic activities than men; according to our poll, over one-third of males refuse to assist their spouse or partner with chores. Women in Japan are the least supported, with 74% receiving little or no aid from their partners. On the other hand, 71% of Indian spouses participate in domestic tasks.

Pressures fluctuate with time, according to our findings. Women are happiest in their early and later years, while in their early and mid-forties, they are at their lowest. That’s when they’re up against the most difficulties balancing a job and home life, as well as caring for both children and elderly parents. As a result, goods and services that may help individuals better organize their lives and balance their priorities will be especially appealing to this demographic.

Parity, Power, and Influence in the Future

When the dust settles from the economic crisis, we believe that women will play an even bigger role in the economy and international order than they do today. What could the economy look like in that scenario? It will be marked by some of the same patterns as the previous five decades. For one thing, women will make up an ever-increasing percentage of the workforce. Working women are rising at a rate of roughly 2.2 percent every year. By 2013, we predict an additional 90 million women to join the workforce, maybe even more if work becomes a need. The majority of middle managers in practically every large consumer corporation are women.

It’ll only be a matter of time until they move up the corporate ladder. Women now control 40% of businesses in the United States, and their companies are growing at the double the rate of the overall economy. (Admittedly, the figures are distorted since small firms compete for government contracts that favor women-owned enterprises.) Work-life balance, competing pressures, and insufficient time will continue to be issued for women.

Companies will discover a whole new spectrum of commercial prospects in women’s social issues if they recognize the potential of the female economy. Women like to purchase goods and services from firms that benefit the globe, particularly other women.

Brands that promote physical and emotional well-being protect and maintain the environment give education and care for the less fortunate, and foster love and connection will benefit, whether directly or indirectly.

Women, on the other hand, are the customers. They have no incentive to accept items that neglect or fail to completely satisfy their demands or do so in a cynical or shallow manner. Women will become more resistant to being categorized, split just by age or wealth, grouped together as “all women,” or, worse, undifferentiated from males.

The financial crisis will end, and now is the moment to start laying the groundwork for post-recession development. When the recovery begins, a company’s chances of success will improve if it focuses on women as a target market rather than any regional market. Understanding and fulfilling the demands of women will be critical to the economy’s recovery; this is where breakthrough growth, loyalty, and market share will be found.

edited and proofread by nikita sharma