Friday, July 27, 2012

Too Much Information Leads to Confused Consumers


With all of the ever-changing health information, trends, tips and scares in the media, consumers say they are finding it more and more difficult to know what to believe. As reported in Supermarket News, the International Food and Information Council Foundation’s 2012 Food & Health Survey found that 52% of consumers says that completing their taxes is easier than knowing what they should and should not be doing to lead a healthier lifestyle.
While consumers are making simple changes (cutting calories, eating more whole grains and fiber), they would like for information to be a little more straightforward. Everyone has an opinion and with today’s technology, these people have multiple ways to broadcast that opinion. Consumers are hearing conflicting statements about certain health related issues, and frustration is mounting.
In efforts to help make things a little easier, companies are coming up with a more accessible approach. QSR Magazine reports that Unilever Food Solutions has developed a solution for restaurants/operators called “Seductive Nutrition.” This particular initiative allows patrons to select a healthier option when dining out. With hopes to also entice restaurants to create healthier options, this new approach also aims to help patrons make better choices.
QR codes and other nutritional information on packaging
According to the World Menu Report, food descriptions are very important. The study found that in 90% of countries surveyed, people are more likely to choose the item on the menu with healthier descriptive words like “fresh” and “steamed.” Apparently, it is all about the subtle changes that can help make a big difference.

As technology continues to develop, consumers will have easier access to healthier choices and solid information backing that up. We already see packages with QR codes. Instead of reading labels, consumers will be able to scan the QR code and make comparisons while in-store. The possibilities are endless.

(via)

No comments: