Skip to content

Case · M3 × Stay (utility service)

Opower: your energy use vs your neighbors'

Opower mailed home energy reports comparing each household's use with similar neighbors, with praise for efficient homes and tips. Across 588,446 households and twelve utilities, usage fell about 2.0% on average, and savings persisted after reports stopped (J-PAL summary of Allcott 2011 and Allcott & Rogers 2014).

M3 ×StayService business

The outcome · 2014

Average energy reduction of about 2.0% (1.4-3.3% across 12 utilities) in a randomized evaluation of 588,446 households; homes dropped after about two years still saved about 2% (Allcott & Rogers, American Economic Review, Oct 2014; via J-PAL). Oracle bought Opower in 2016 (~$532M).

Case grade for the number: A. Evidence grade for the mechanism link: A.
Read the source

Stage cell: M3 × Stay (utility service).

What they did. Home energy reports comparing a household's use with similar neighbors, plus approval for efficient households and practical tips, sent monthly or quarterly.

The mechanism. Chou cites Opower as a conformity anchor GT#58 (Actionable Gamification Ch.9, p.224) inspired by Cialdini: feedback on how close you are to the norm. It is social proof from similar others INF-T-SP-17 (Influence Ch.4, p.107). Praise for above-norm homes guards against the boomerang effect.

The outcome. -2.0% energy use (2014) Case grade A. From a regulator, a public filing or a peer-reviewed study. on average (1.4-3.3% by utility); monthly reports beat quarterly ones by about half a point, and savings persisted when reports stopped.

What it means at your stage. Comparison with true, close peers is one of the best-evidenced engagement levers, and it fits B2B too (usage vs similar teams). Pair the comparison with recognition for people already above the norm.

Caveats. Effects vary by site; later work found early sites were more responsive than later ones. Mechanism link Evidence grade A. Robust evidence: replicated, peer-reviewed research..

Would you have called it?

This case is also a round of Predict the Outcome: read the situation, pick what you think happened, then see the evidence.

Play this round

Try this

The techniques behind it

Each one is a starting point, not a recipe. Gamify It turns a technique into an experiment card for your product: the change, the metric, the guardrail and how long the test needs at your traffic.

  • TechniqueEvidence grade B. Moderate evidence: solid studies with some limits.

    Conformity Anchors (GT#58)

    true peer benchmarks

    Feedback that shows users how they compare with a relevant norm, such as how many campaigns similar teams send compared with theirs. Chou's lesson from home-energy reports: users already above the norm can slide back toward it unless they are recognized for beating it.

  • TechniqueEvidence grade B. Moderate evidence: solid studies with some limits.

    Choose testimonials, case studies and usage data by the visitor's industry, role, size, country, language or experience level, and let users filter reviews by "people like me". People follow those who resemble them far more than generic crowds.

  • TechniqueEvidence grade B. Moderate evidence: solid studies with some limits.

    Write messages that show the desired behavior as common among people like the user, and never advertise how common the unwanted behavior is. Chou's warning case: a park sign saying many visitors take wood raised theft compared with no sign at all.

Limits

What we don’t claim

Sources

Source IDs: CASE-M31GT#58INF-T-SP-17

Book content is paraphrased, never quoted at length. Last verified October 24, 2026.

Your product

Find the stage your product is stuck in

Your product has its own version of this story. Find the stage it’s in and the move that fits it. Connecting is free; a Pro subscription starts it.