moderate, confident, wealthy
17% of adult female population | 16.2 million women
They are religious and most are married though a notable minority are single.
They have the highest socioeconomic status of all segments and are the
second most urban segment even though a majority live in rural areas.
have access to land
Who are they?
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (SES)
Networked Elites are wealthy, rural, better educated than average, as the most likely to have completed tertiary education (6%) and the second most likely of having received secondary education (29%), though still almost half have no or informal schooling. They are mostly married, spread over a range of life stages, and show hints of generational wealth and high social connectivity. They are the most religious segment, and look to their spouses to make decisions. Although they are the least likely to own land personally (7%), they are the most likely to jointly own land (36%). This suggests that many may either come from wealthy families or have married into them.
Social Financial Network
Networked Elites are highly social but turn to personal funds in an emergency, highlighting their wealth and stability. They tend to have a larger social network than almost any other segment. Almost three-quarters of the segment (74%) indicate they talk to two or more people daily, which is the second-highest average number of people spoken to each day. Networked Elites are notably less likely than average to use social sources to raise significant funds in an emergency. Just 30% use social sources versus a national average of 52%. By contrast, they are much more likely to draw on personal resources. Fifty-nine percent draw from personal resources compared to a national average of 34%.
What do they want?
They aspire to build their long term savings, specifically through bank savings accounts, while also better managing household finances by building cash reserves – they would rather save than borrow. They are open to trying new things, albeit with advice from trusted advisors to help them manage the complexity.
How do they manage their finances?
Networked Elites measure above the national averages in all categories of financial behavior and show particularly strong capacity to shape income, second only to Social Optimists. Networked Elites plan little for expenses and perhaps do not stay in control of them. While their income stability should make it easier to shape expenses, their relative wealth may reduce their motivation to do so.
FINANCIAL BEHAVIOR INDEX
HOW THEY PRIORITIZE A WINDFALL
When given a windfall, Networked Elites would save a third in a bank, while they would keep just over a quarter in cash. With the greatest formal inclusion, savings is their primary use case. Their windfall preference of saving in a bank over keeping the cash at home is essentially the inverse of the national average. Networked Elites would allocate 34% to banks and 27% to cash, whereas the average Pakistani women would allocate 20% to banks and 34% toward cash. They would allocate just 11% of a windfall to investment, against 19% on average. Their above-average number of unpaid monthly expenses suggests that they may already be aggressively saving, in households where they do not have strong decision-making authority. However would also allocate double the average of 2% to spending on pleasure. They are not notably impulsive, suggesting they may feel free to spend in this way after meeting their savings goals.
As their relative wealth and higher levels of education would suggest, Networked Elites are both formally and informally included at above-average rates. They also own formal and informal accounts at broadly similar rates, unlike all other segments. They are avid savers, frequently using multiple channels, but exhibit well below average use of credit. Still, eighty-five percent of Networked Elites do not have accounts with formal financial institutions, and of the 15% who do, almost 40% do not make deposits on a monthly basis. While relative to other segments, Networked Elites’ bank account ownership and usage are high, much of the segment remains uncaptured by FSPs.
WEEKLY INCOME VOLATILITY
Shaping Income and Expenses
Networked Elites plan little for expenses and perhaps do not stay in control of them. Their income volatility is among the lowest nationally, with 52% indicating their income is very predictable week-to-week and another 31% reporting that it is moderately stable. While their stable income should make it easier to shape expenses, their relative wealth may reduce their motivation to do so. Indeed they report facing a slightly above-average number of unpaid household expenses, suggesting they are more effective at shaping incomes than their expenses.
Networked Elites are among the most likely segments to save. They use more savings channels than any other segment, although family remains their main savings destination. Eighty percent of Networked Elites save, and 51% do so at least quarterly, compared to 43% nationally. This is more than any other segment except Confident Planners. Twelve percent save at least quarterly using informal groups, and 32% save at least quarterly with family. Yet only 10% save in a bank. This is noteworthy, considering they would allocate more of a windfall to bank savings than any other destination. Perhaps, because Networked Elites are unlikely to control household planning, they are provided with fewer savings options outside of the family, or find it harder to access them. Given their windfall prioritization, they might believe that banks are more appropriate for saving larger amounts at a time. In this case, FSPs interested in building loyalty with this segment could provide a strong value proposition by enabling highly convenient, low-commitment, incremental savings plans.
SOURCES OF BORROWING
Networked Elites feel more able to quickly raise significant funds in an emergency than any other segment. This is in contrast to their difficulties with everyday spending, and perhaps reflects both the fewer emergencies than average they face, and their ability to build reserves to cover emergency expenses. This reduces their reliance on borrowing, reflected in their very limited use of multiple debt channels: while they are significant savers with family, they borrow from them less frequently than average. Their borrowing rates with informal groups and especially formal financial institutions are noticeably above national averages, but still at very low rates overall. They are less likely than average to own land or livestock.
Networked Elites’ limited planning may be linked to the security they feel with their relative wealth, or to their below-average likelihood of participating in household financial decision-making. Although Networked Elites skew heavily neutral when asked if they have a plan to manage their expenses (47% versus 25% nationally), they are the least likely of any segment to disagree that they have a plan (18% versus 35% nationally). Their relatively frequent, diversified savings strategy suggests they appreciate savings channels that align with their high social involvement and support their ability to save opportunistically (they are more impulsive) and conveniently (they are moderately conscientious).
HAS A PLAN TO MANAGE EXPENSES
62% of Networked Elites have high to highest technology use — more than twice as much as the next-closest segment. Given their average levels of smartphone access, their digital usage may be through other channels, such as feature phones and computers — which they are the most likely segment to use (11% against 5% nationally). Most indicate they use their phone more than once per day, and they have the highest likelihood of any segment using five or more times per day. They also report the heaviest use of text messages, with over half sending texts at least a few times per week. This aligns with Networked Elites being the most likely segment to speak to multiple people daily (67%).
How do they think?
Networked Elites have a markedly positive outlook on their future, likely informed by their relatively wealthy status — they are also the least likely to be dissatisfied with the past five years. They view favorably their ability to effectively assimilate new tools and skills, and believe they are able to influence their circumstances. Networked Elites’ locus of control is much more internal than average (58% versus 40%), and their self-efficacy is higher (50% against 39% nationally). They have overall moderate-to-high self-esteem, but are notably less likely than average to have low self-esteem. They also seldom respond strongly to psychometric measures, and are less likely than average to score either highest or lowest in many measures.
LOCUS OF CONTROL
Networked Elites are more open to new experiences than average, and open overall, with moderate-to-high conscientiousness and likelihood of impulsive spending. Their conscientiousness is more likely to be high (38%) than low (33%), though a significant minority score medium levels (29%). Their impulsivity is slightly more likely to be high (37%) than low (34%). Their high openness (51% high compared to 39% nationally) suggests curiosity and confidence and willingness to try out new strategies and solutions in pursuit of their goals. They may be an early adopter segment insofar as a lack of influence in household decision-making doesn’t hold them back.
Networked Elites are not particularly comfortable with debt, despite their high openness, and they do not see themselves as dependable. They are slightly more likely than average to have low or lowest comfort with debt (43% compared with 40% nationally). Just 12% have high or highest comfort with debt, far below the 26% average. This is strongly reflected in their limited and infrequent borrowing.
They are moderately deliberate about their saving, but have low belief in earning enough to save – lower than average overall, though they are less likely to have the lowest level of belief. They also have limited belief in the safety of their savings, though again they are less likely to have the lowest levels of belief. Indeed, although they are frequent and diversified savers, their planning behavior seems to lack strong direction. This suggests that they save more opportunistically and in a more ad hoc manner.
TRUST IN SOCIAL FINANCIAL NETWORKS
Trust in People
Notably, Networked Elites neither strongly trust nor strongly distrust people and report similarly ambivalent opinions about the equality of their communities and their communities’ willingness to invest in them. They are slightly less trusting than average of social financial networks, however.
Trust in Institutions
Networked Elites are more trusting towards banks than any other segment, and are the least likely to have the lowest trust in government. They show the same ambivalence toward their trust in media and respect for authority as they do toward their trust in people.
TRUST IN BANKS
MEN ARE BETTER FINANCIAL MANAGERS THAN WOMEN
Nearly half of Networked Elites (47%) believe that men are better financial managers than women, yet they feel less strongly than Pakistani women on average (64%), and may look to a future where that is not the case. Nearly all Networked Elites believe that husbands and wives should know each others’ financial affairs and feel that boys and girls should be educated in the same way about finance. They are slightly more likely than average to perceive gender does not matter in loan decisions, which given their formal inclusion may reflect their own experiences, and are neutral about whether women understand new technology better than men.