January Question 3
In the article, Ball et al. provided a cost analysis breakdown of the various intervention strategies they implemented throughout the duration of their research. Providing participants in the price reduction and combination groups with a 20% target item discount cost an estimated $13,777 Australian dollars (equivalent to about $9932 American dollars) during the 3-month intervention period, only to observe no sustainable or long term positive effects related to fruit and vegetable purchasing patterns. If you were working as a supermarket dietitian how would you justify the inclusion of fruits and vegetables in weekly ads to a CEO who was worried about preserving retail profits on fruits and vegetables? Would you use any information gleaned from Ball et al? Why or why not?
posted by Unknown @ 8:50 PM
25 comments
25 Comments:
I would first explain the benefits increased fruit and vegetable consumption would have on their consumers. I would also provide ways the cost could be reduced, like restricting ads to fruits and vegetables that are in season, and decreasing promotion sales in processed food items. I would share the information from the Ball et al study because it demonstrates how consumers are very driven by price and that having ads in at least some fruits and vegetables could make a large difference.
I mentioned the idea of return on investment (ROI) in my answer to question 2 to some degree, so I might try to approach cost concerns from another direction. Justifying spending a lot of money can be very challenging. It might be fairly effective to first look for alternative ways to fund the plan. There might be grants available at the local level or even up to the federal level. You might also be surprised at what community businesses might be interested in forming a partnership of sorts to help support a program that promotes healthy choices. Promotion would likely be a strong element to keep interest and promote success long-term, but promotion would also cost money. The goal would be to minimize any potential cost the the chain [to maximize potential ROI] before attempting to justify costs. If I really had to search for a justification I would take the philanthropic angle and ask the CEO if he/she would like the chain to be recognized for promoting the health of its customers and community. Being involved in community betterment can establish surprising levels of local loyalty, possibly increasing store traffic overall. It has been a pretty common theme in advertisement lately. Trying to piggy back my initiative off of something that is probably already on the CEOs radar makes it seem like a small add on versus a whole giant project of its own. This was another strategy described in the (free) webinar I mentioned earlier.
Unfortunately, business professionals are rarely thinking about the benefit of their consumers' health, but rather they are thinking of better marketing techniques and any way to boost their sales. So unfortunately, a dietitian may not be the best person for this justification. However, taking a round-about way such as heavily advertising the health benefits to the consumers may boost sales and in-turn make the CEO rethink the idea of not including produce in the weekly ads.
Similarly, I think it is difficult to convince a business to take higher consideration on the general health of their consumers than profit. My attempts to justify increasing promotions of fruits and vegetables to the CEO by maybe giving the suggestion of sourcing more local produce from community farmers and market the produce in such a way. There is a large cost-benefit of sourcing local, seasonal produce in that it has lower transportation cost and assists in funding the community as well.
I agree with Stephanie that business professionals are more concerned about company profit and marketing rather than consumers' health. As a supermarket dietitian, I would point out to the CEO the benefits of promoting fruits and vegetables with a focus on customers' health. It would be beneficial for the company's image to let our customers know we care about their health to increase their trust in us as their preferred supermarket and to provide resources for those who want to be healthier. I would focus on the financial and marketing benefits for the company rather than presenting a scientific research paper about how prices can increase fruit and vegetable consumption for our customers. However, if the CEO happens to be a person with a keen interest on improving the health of the community then I would summarize the findings of this research article as justification.
Providing fruits and vegetables at an affordable price can also be an appeal itself. It can draw in new customers to visit the supermarket to purchase produce at a lower price compared to other stores. It may also be a way to increase customer loyalty by providing lower prices on produce as well as advertising to the consumers about the company's actions to care for its customers' health.
As Stephanie mentioned, business professionals’ first priorities typically do not include the health and well-being of the consumer and a dietitian’s point of view may not be as respected as someone who says they can boost the sales of a grocery store. Like Sophie stated, you could talk about some of the results of the Ball et al study. For example, I might mention that the price reduction only group purchased 2.4 more servings of fruit per week and 3.2 more servings of vegetables. I thought Vivian made a good point about how this would be a strategic move for a company’s image. When talking to the CEO, you could mention that this would be a good move for the company in that sense and might bring in a new market of customers who are more health-oriented.
When advocating for these potential ad modifications, you would have to justify what other gains could arise for the company in leiu of marginal financial losses. I think Amanda made a great point discussing how these changes could reach into a new target market of customer who are more health-oriented. While current changes in the ads may create a slight loss for current customers, the behavioral shopping habits of these health-oriented, NEW customers may make up for the loss leaders by increasing overall sales in the store. That is definitely a factor that would have to be discussed - the total revenue from novel customers that these ad modifications would bring into the store. I think this is a strategy similar to when Hy-Vee entered the scene in Normal. Many individuals considered this store to be "healthier" so many customers left their regular supermarket for the new opportunity.
I feel that I would still include information from the Ball et al. (2015) as part of my evidence to support the addition of fruits and vegetables in weekly advertisements. While some of the research showed no significant long-term benefits, the addition of fruits and vegetables in weekly advertisements and sales did lead to an overall increase in fruit and vegetable purchases. If price reduction for fruits and vegetables were still included in weekly deals, I think that there would be an overall profit that may sway a hesitant CEO.
As Vivian, Amanda, and Jenn stated, it could be profitable to show the CEO the potential gains of including fruits and vegetables in weekly advertisements, especially regarding the positive effects on the company's reputation. As mentioned in the Ball et al. (2015) article, an increase of at least 50 grams of fruits and vegetables per day can lead to a 20 percent decrease in chronic disease risk/mortality. This bit of information could be included as an educational piece in the weekly advertisements. Coupling this with a price reduction for in-season fruits and vegetables would give consumers more incentive to buy these produce items.
I completely agree with Sophie when she declared that the customers are driven by price. I would introduce this fact in relation to the purchasing and advertising of fruits and vegetables to the CEO in hope of increasing sales on the produce. Promoting fruits and vegetables in season will help both the customer and company due to increasing the consumption of fruits and vegetables and the profit the store will receive. The Ball et al study can be a starting point of future studies and sale techniques to increase the health and longevity of the consumer as well as the business.
Unfortunately as Stephanie mentioned most businesses are not concerned with the benefits of the consumers and more concerned with income. However as Amanda mentioned this could target more health conscious consumers and could potentially give the supermarket a healthy reputation. Therefore, when justifying costs this would be an important subject to discuss. Other ways to preserve retail profits that you could mention would be bringing in local produce and stocking more fruits, stocking more in season fruits and vegetables and again promoting and marketing the in season produce. I would also justify the benefits it would bring to consumers because I think this is still a very important factor that although they may not be concerned with, they should be. I would also include the information from the Ball et al. (2015) to provide concrete evidence that weekly produce advertisements increases produce purchases.
I would utilize the findings from Ball et al., and would suggest that several fruit and vegetable items be discounted and advertised in the weekly ads. I would first emphasize the current state of the American diet and its health impacts, with specific attention to the health benefits of fruits and vegetables. The study indicated that a 20% price reduction positively impacted fruit and vegetable purchases over the time the discount was maintained. While these habits were not maintained after the discount ended, it is important to note that the discount affected shopping habits when it was offered. Featuring several different produce items each week at discounted prices thus would likely increase purchase of those items during that week. Additionally, changing these discounted items each week would then likely shift demand from the previously discounted items to the newly discounted items. These ideas are supported by the statement in the study, “a relatively long duration of exposure to price reductions may be required to sustain changes in healthy purchasing behavior.” The proposed advertisement strategy may not be profitable over time, which could be a disadvantage to the company. However, I believe that there may be other ways that the store could make up for these potential financial losses including offering value-added items prepared on site (such as sandwiches, salads, etc) which may provide a more desirable profit margin.
Like Stephanie stated, for a CEO it all comes down to the numbers. I think the research from Ball et al. could be useful when explaining the impact of decreasing produce prices, and can catch the chain’s attention. Reducing the price of produce can be a great marketing strategy for a store, especially since it would be unique and uncommon, and would most likely attract customers. I do believe to convince a CEO it ultimately comes down to the numbers. You can explain the health benefits and the impact it would have as much as you possibly can, but making a profit is generally the most important thing to a company. Financially, I’m sure it could be possible. Although, it may result in some undesirable repercussions for their customers like increased prices in non-perishable items, which may or may-not work for their store depending on their customer base. Overall, I think if we want to see stores decrease the prices of produce, it will reside in government policy and regulation.
Gina, I really like your idea of having local businesses in the community team up. Forming partnerships would get the word out within the community and promote healthy choices. Perhaps another route could be grocery store chains approach these local businesses and seek funding or donations to reduce the price of produce, like a sponsor. They would be promoting health and their business. I also love the idea of tagging on to an innovative rather than creating a whole new project. This can save time and costs, which CEO’s are generally concerned about. A CEO may be more open to the idea if it doesn’t require too many company resources.
I would first start off by explaining that any marketing strategy is going to cost more at first, however once consumers habits start to change financial cost should decrease due to increase of sale for these particular items. I would also present the point that if consumers are buying more produce, lean meats, dairy (perishable items) these consumers will need to return to the store more often than consumers who buy food that has a longer shelf life. Therefore, grocery store traffic might in fact increase. I think a study done on how many times people go to a grocery store a month based on what they purchase (perishable or non- perishable items) would be an interesting study that might show CEOs how promoting produce might be beneficial to them.
I also think Sophie made a good point about how to approach advertisement. Promoting the whole produce section would take up far too much space in ads and would advertise some foods that are not in season which could lead to consumers purchasing bad produce. Promoting one or two items that are in season would minimize ad space, but would also provide consumers with good, healthy in season items.
I also agree with Holly that if produce would be sold at a discounted rate in the long run grocery stores would make a profit if purchasing of these items increased even at a discounted rate. Selling a processed item at a discounted rate is selling a cheap item for an even cheaper rate. However, selling produce (a more expensive, perishable item) at a discounted rate would be selling a more expensive item for only a slightly cheaper rate and thus making more of a profit compared to processed items.
Increased exposure increases sales. Fresh fruits and vegetables are highly perishable, featuring these products in weekly ads, and providing incentives (discounts, etc.) for these products as Ball et al. demonstrated increased the sale of these products. Increasing the sale of these perishable products, increases the turnover of these products on store shelves. Thereby, decreasing the company’s loss from product spoilage and increasing the company’s bottom line.
Similarly to what Gina mentioned, I think a wise decision could be trying to form partnerships with organizations within the local area to try and promote healthy living, by promoting fruits and vegetables inside the store and out. Partnerships with a common cause can help reduce costs, and further push the goal of higher fruit and vegetable intake for consumers. Advertising along with education of how to use these fruits and vegetables (as mentioned in the previous question) can increase sales, and as Kandice mentioned, increase product turnover. I'm not sure if I would include evidence from the Ball et al study, being hesitant about the lack of long term positive effects related to fruit and vegetable purchasing patterns.
I, as well as Nikki, agree with what Gina mentioned about forming partnerships with local organizations or farms. A chunk of people seem to approve of foods when they see that they are from "local" food sources due to the notion that they are "healthier". In order to increase sales one must gain the attention and approval of the customers and this could be one way of going about doing so.
The financial benefits of offering discounted nutrient dense foods is two pronged. Initially, customers attracted by the lower prices of these staple foods will purchase these items and others from this particular grocer. As shown from the common discount marketing tools implemented with every holiday, a dramatic sale bring people in the door, and once there people make their additional purchases via convenience, generating revenue for the business owner. Secondly, the business with a conscious model applies. If advertised as a good will effort the fruit and vegetable staples discount will increase the notoriety of the grocer within the community. The Ball et al study is a valuable resource for indicating consumer alertness to discounted items as an indicator for food purchases. Offering the discounted prices to the entire community rather than the limited study subjects may create a different result by poaching high vegetable/fruit shoppers from other chains.
Including discounts on fruits and vegetables may attract more consumers inside the store doors, especially in today's culture where nutrition is always a hot topic. This would likely mean that the supermarket would have to offset these discounts by raising the prices of other food items because as mentioned, supermarket are businesses and are concerned with generating profit. Perhaps taking advantage of local produce sources would offset some of the produce transportation costs, or maybe including highlight recipes and information about using fruits and vegetables would increase their sales. This would be a task that a dietitian could team up to tackle with a marketing and communications person who better understands consumers.
If I were working towards the justification of including more fruits and vegetables within the weekly circular ads and pitching this idea to the CEO, I definitely feel that I would begin by focusing on the marketing aspect of this decision and the good publicity that this decision could bring about for the company as a whole; similar to the point that Holly made about providing the supermarket company with a positive reputation. Retail grocery stores can provide critical opportunities to increase access to healthy foods, including fresh fruits, vegetables, and lean meats, potentially improving the health of their customers and the individuals in the community. I also really like the point that Carly made about increased traffic within the grocery store. I would help the CEO of the company to understand the impact that this could have upon overall sales of the company. Sales could potentially increase greatly due to this aspect alone. How many times have we gone into the store for one thing and come out with a whole basket full?? I feel that a similar principle could apply, especially if we are drawing more and more people into the store with our attractive ads.
Wow you all came up with some very interesting points while answering this question! One popular response was to explain the improved company image that could come from discounting fruits and vegetables. An additional shared opinion seemed to be that CEOs don't necessarily care about the health of the consumer, but consumers care about the health of the consumer. I think the RD's job would definitely be to figure out the best way to present the consumer benefits, while explaining how those benefits will financially benefit the company.
I would speak with the companies CEO about the potential costs and benefits associated with increasing the amount of fruits and vegetables in the weekly sales. Rather than narrowly focusing on the profit margins from those fruits and vegetables, look at the other indirect impacts that may come from the change. In addition to increasing the healthfulness of their customers, the change could increase the stores general sales and draw in more customers. For instance, Hy-Vee grocery stores publically advertise their in-store dietitians and customers can even make an appointment for nutrition counseling. This alone may bring in a large new population of customers. With proper advertising, the proposed weekly ad changes could have similar effects.
I think it is important for dietitians to look at their situation from both the position of a nutrition expert and as a business person. As Steph and Amanda mentioned, the grocery store needs to make sales in order to maintain business. I think it would be great to use HyVee as an example of how to use an in-store dietitian. Hy-Vee does a great job promoting their dietitian to the shoppers. The dietitian needs to remember that people who do not want to make a lifestyle change will not change until they are ready. It would be most effective for the dietitian to work with individuals who are willing and ready to make a lifestyle change. I don’t think it is fair to look at the study in terms of dollars and produce servings. There probably were people who made lifestyle modifications from this study but there were some that went back to their old habits. As dietitians, we need to remember every small victory counts, and if we influenced one person to change then that is a victory.
Abby made a great point about how people who do not want to make a lifestyle change will not change until they are ready to make a change. With this consideration in mind, I think that emphasizing healthy products in the store flyers can potentially change the clientele of the store as Amanda, Vivian, and Jenn pointed out. Carly also had a good point that increased sales of healthy and perishable products might likely increase the stores foot traffic and thus, the store’s sales. Finding and utilizing a study that demonstrates increased sales of healthy products resulted in increased profit margins would go a long way in persuading a CEO to embrace the inclusion of fruits and vegetables in supermarket circulars.
Krista has a good point about promoting the RD's who work in the store. Increasing the visibility of a RD gives shoppers access to our services and shows the consumers the initiative the store is making to promote a healthy lifestyle, which like Krista stated, could also draw in more costumers.
Post a Comment
<< Home