Reference no: EM132250936

A number of health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO), have recommended consumers ‘. . . to reduce daily fat intake below 30 per cent of total calories’; ‘. . . to limit intake of saturated fatty acids, which should not exceed 10 per cent of total energy intake’; and ‘. . . to consume less than 300 mg of cholesterol daily’. The need to reduce fat and cholesterol-related consumption is gaining increasing public acceptance. Growing awareness of the link between diet and health has led to major changes in consumer habits. As a result, there is a growing demand for foods with health enhancing properties, such as ‘low-fat’ or ‘light’ products. For the past decade, world production of low-fat food has expanded and it is now a multi-billion dollar industry. In the UK, for example, sales of reduced calorie products amounted to more than US$800 million, with an estimated growth of 5 per cent per year; and in the United States sales since the mid 1990s have grown to US$40 billions. The concept of low-fat products means that these products have a minimal level of fat. This level often requires some modifications to the composition and nature of the product. This modification can affect different aspects of these low-fat products, including their sensory properties and their healthiness. This means that claims such as ‘low’, ‘reduced’, ‘less’, ‘lean’, ‘light’, ‘healthy’ are not always supported by a clear definition of the changes in the composition of the product. This has led to considerable confusion among consumers. Besides being perceived as healthier, low-fat products must offer good quality and hedonic attributes, which should in principle be at least the same as those of the regular (full-fat) products to which consumers are accustomed, if these low-fat products are to be a commercial success. Thus, the conflict between ‘health’ and ‘sensory appeal’ (e.g. taste) is recognized as being influential in the choice of low-fat products by consumers. Another important influential factor in the low-fat food market has been the drive for weight loss, i.e. the body’s aesthetic appeal. Over the last decades, there has been a marked trend toward an increasingly thin, and yet physically fit, ideal of attractiveness in economically advanced societies, directly linked to the consumption of low-fat food products. However, cost is an equally important factor in this market. Higher lean-to-fat ratios and other non-food ingredients have tended to raise the cost of manufacturing low-fat products. It is estimated that these new low-fat products may be anywhere from 10 to 30 per cent dearer than their full-fat counterparts. This apparent drawback may be partially offset by the fact that growing numbers of consumers are interested in reducing fat intake and so may perceive low-fat products as better value for money. THE SURVEY A study in 2002 examined Greek consumers’ attitudes towards low-fat food products. The research revolved around the potential conflict between the ‘sensory appeal’ (taste) and the ‘healthiness’ of low-fat products. The study aimed to segment the Greek market in terms of users’ attitudes towards light products. All four consumer clusters identified in the survey paid particular attention to the hedonic factor when consuming food, and assigned less importance to price in their overall selection criteria when choosing foodstuffs. Additionally, the percentages of awareness of and use of low-fat products, by consumers, were approximately equal, while the market penetration of these low-fat products was fairly widespread. Cluster 1 consisted of ‘fervent supporters’ of the low-fat food products. The large majority of this cluster (strongly) agreed that low-fat products met their expectations in terms of sensory characteristics, and that low-fat products are healthier due to their lower calorie content. Cluster 2 comprised ‘satisfied consumers with low-fat food products’ healthiness’. Almost all these cluster members (strongly) agreed that low-fat products did not meet their expectations in terms of sensory appeal. However, the vast majority of the cluster believed that low-fat products are healthier when compared with their full-calorie counterparts. Cluster 3 was defined as the ‘opposed to the low-fat products’. In line with cluster 2, all cluster 3 members believed that low-fat products did not meet their expectations in terms of sensory characteristics. case study 1 240 CASE STUDY 1 Furthermore, they (strongly) disagreed with the view that low-fat products are healthier than their full-calorie equivalents. Cluster members were either occasional low-fat product users or they bought them for another reason, e.g. weight loss for aesthetic reasons, without consciously relating this to improved health. Finally, cluster 4 comprised ‘satisfied consumers with low-fat food products’ sensory characteristics’. Low-fat products met the sensory expectations of the large majority of this fourth cluster. They were occasional low-fat product buyers, for whom the taste of the low-fat products was not perceived to be a constraint, or, similar to cluster 3, they consumed low-fat products for aesthetic reasons. Overall, the survey concluded that those consumers who considered low-fat products to be healthy tended to be young, a slightly higher ratio of male to female, mostly married, of average income, and their educational level did not appear to be related to their high degree of health awareness. Those who did not think that low-fat products were healthy tended to be middle-aged, of either sex, mostly married, of low to average income, and their educational level was not a significant discriminating factor. In general, the socio-demographic differences were not particularly remarkable. THE LESSONS LEARNED Greek consumers seemed to be willing to substitute specially manufactured low-fat foods in their diet. It appears that low-fat products constitute common food choices; and the purchase of low-fat foods cannot be taken as indicative of any kind of ‘innovative’ food purchase behaviour. One of the most important findings was consumers’ uncertainty about whether or not low-fat food products are superior to their full-calorie counterparts in terms of sensory appeal and healthiness. This uncertainty was shared by more than one type of low-fat product user. The motives behind the selection of low-fat foods differed for different consumer types, and are linked to different attitudes towards hedonism and healthiness. These two motives seem to function either as substitutes or in a complementary way, depending on the perceptions that consumers have of low-fat foods. Furthermore, the main constraint Greek consumers are faced with when consuming light foods is their sensory appeal, especially when these low-fat foods are compared to ‘common’ food products. Healthiness seems to be much less important as a constraint on Greek consumer behaviour. While information which identifies products as low in fat generally lowers judgements of expected sensory quality, the magnitude of this effect was often found to be rather small, partly because it differed markedly in strength and direction amongst various consumer sub-groups, in this particular case among the four clusters. On the contrary, low-fat foods were considered to be healthier by the majority (61.3 per cent) of the sample. MARKETING IMPLICATIONS A very popular misinterpretation of the ‘low-fat’ claim means that a large percentage of consumers perceive low caloric intake products as healthier products. Yet this equation is accurate only indirectly, through the beneficial results of a low-fat diet in terms of individual health and physical condition. Two important matters seem to be overlooked: (a) weight reduction as a selection motive for low-fat food is not, and should not be, directly related to one’s health, although it constitutes a potential motive to buy light food products for a large percentage of consumers (clusters 3 and 4), and (b) the fact that these products possibly contain some unhealthy chemical additives such as fat substitutes. Consequently, the degree of conscious purchasing of low-fat foods closely reflects consumers’ underlying health consciousness, which thus turns out to be a central motive of low-fat preference. Clusters 1 and 2 which perceive low-fat products as being healthier can be considered to be conscious low-fat food ‘buyers’. On the other hand, the remaining 40 per cent appear to purchase low-fat foods either occasionally (‘opposed’) or because of reasons not directly related to the health consciousness selection motive (‘users’). Nevertheless, marketers need to recognize that willingness to purchase foods in order to be healthy is often combined with a willingness to pay premiums for purchasing low-fat food products. Culture, education, purchasing power and other factors (e.g. labelling, information) considerably influence consumer habits, and hence the percentage of income spent on food. Since all social groups do not purchase the same kind of food products, the extent to which price affects acceptance will vary according to the type of low-fat product and the type of consumer motivation. Finally, two additional implications should be kept in mind: (1) hedonic responses to sensory characteristics of foods may be modified by extended sensory exposure. This should be encouraging for the low-fat food industry in the long run, because whereas dietary changes initially have had poor acceptance by clusters 2 and 3, these may over time achieve better levels of acceptance simply through repeated use; (2) when consumers have a negative opinion about the healthiness of low-fat food, as is the case with clusters 3 and 4, counter-arguments via marketing communications might be the only way in which these opinions can be challenged and changed.

APPEALING TO TASTE BUDS OR HEALTHY LIFESTYLES?

1. Search for market data/reports about low-fat food products in your country. In your opinion, does the conflict between taste and healthiness also apply?

2. Identify the 4 Ps for low-fat products (product, price, place, promotion) for each consumer cluster. Which of the four components should the relevant promotion strategy be based on?

3. Comment on consumers’ tendency to misinterpret the low-fat claim to be a healthy claim. Do you believe that this applies to your country too? Can you think of examples from other product categories where consumers tend to misinterpret the different claims made about goods and services?