July 2, 2007
Grocers Seek Edge Through Organic Certification
Hannaford Bros. and a number of other grocers are out to convince consumers that when it comes to organics and natural foods, there is nothing that companies such as Whole Foods can do that mainstream grocers can’t do just as well if not better.
Hannaford Bros. is among a number of supermarket chains that have taken steps to become recognized as government “certified organic retailers.”
To gain certification, chains need to agree to keep conventional and organic products separate from one another and not, for example, prepare them using the same equipment such as knives or deli slicers.
Stores participating in the program, reports The Associated Press, agree to on-site inspections from Quality Assurance International.
Santo Carnabuci, a store manager for Hannaford Bros., said consumers of organic items were seeking assurances from the company that conventional items were not tainting natural products.
“People that are totally into buying organic foods, they understand that it cannot coexist with something that isn’t organic,” he told The Associated Press. “Our responsibility is making sure the products stay organic from point A to point B, when it’s in your hands. If you don’t take all of the steps and keep things separate, it nullifies it.”
Tara Withington, who shops at Hannaford Bros., is one of those consumers with that mindset. She wants a guarantee from the store that organic and conventional products are separated from one another.
“I need to know it’s natural and I’m not giving them chemicals,” said Ms. Withington. “I’m trying to keep them healthy, and this reassures me that they are not coming into contact with anything I don’t want them to.”
Discussion Question: The separation of conventional and organics sounds similar to certain religious edicts prohibiting foods from being prepared and consumed together. How seriously do you regard the demand by consumers for separation in organics? What does it mean for retailers?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
With all kinds of recalls on food consumers have a legitimate concern about the quality of the food they purchase. That is one of the reasons consumers choose particular stores at which they will do business. The credibility of the store and its ability to offer fresh, quality food is important to the consumer.
Whether or not that means that a certification from some organization or government body is necessary is a part of the overall question of developing trust. To keep consumers loyal, they have to trust the retailer. In some cases, certification may be an important way to develop that trust.
Much ado about nothing.
Separating organic and non-organic products has long been a challenge for retailers ever since organic products started appearing in supermarkets. Placing “like” products together has been shown to assist consumers in finding what they want more quickly, and that’s important. The standards for “certified organic retailers” appear to be quite specific and detailed, and represent a real commitment from store operations in procedures and staff training especially. This additional certification will probably only be taken on by a smaller number of supermarkets.
As long as a growing variety of organic products are available in supermarkets, I believe most consumers will be satisfied.
Retailers need to understand that consumers shop at Whole Foods for many reasons, including great merchandising. The recent rash of product recalls, in the minds of consumers, encourages organic/natural purchasing. Recent increases in organic baby food purchases are a good example. What is missed by the consumer is that there can and will be product recalls of organic/natural products. This will take some of the steam out of the growth.
Separation is only as important insofar as it make the product easier for the consumer to find organic products on the shelf.
Separate Kosher from non-Kosher and consumers understand why. Separate store brands or generics from national brands and shoppers get it. Separate displays of different grades of beef and it makes sense. Separate stunted, overpriced organic produce from the affordable good stuff and consumers applaud it.
In this discussion topic we see the continued interchangeable use of the terms “organic” and “natural,” neither of which has a generally-shared definition in the minds of shoppers. Additionally, no specific, measurable, demonstrable, or tested advantage has ever been determined for “organonat” (my newest, made-up word) products. Good for the environment? Prove it. Good for manufacturing systems? Show me. Good for my health? Some evidence, please. Good for retail? Undeniably.
Ms. Withington, the chemiphobe Hannaford shopper, will still have to ingest 38 different unorganic (not inorganic) ingredients recently approved by the FDA to be included in “certified organic” products. I wonder if she knows this or if her wonderful retailer will tell her. I also wonder if she would know a chemical if it smacked her ‘upside the head.
Here are some consumer questions about processed or packaged organonat products (herein referred to as “they”) to which I’d be interested in the responses: 1.) Do you perceive that they (e.g., Safeway’s “O” brand) are superior in flavor, nutrition, or any other way? 2.) Should (and do) they cost more and, if so, is it justified? 3.) If you bought them, how would they benefit you and your family?
On the retail side, it stands to reason that the cost of processed or packaged organonat products is higher because of the higher cost of ingredients. Retailers who integrate organonat products onto the shelf must manage shopper price comparisons by keeping organonat prices close to the other products in the category. By moving organonats to a segregated area, retailers can increase their margins to match those from other products in the category because shoppers won’t easily be able to compare prices with unorganic packaged and processed products.
By the way, recent food product recalls have nothing to do with their organic or unorganic pedigrees. The recalls address either problematic additives (to products that might even be completely organonat), or the existence of a completely organic material such as the e coli bacteria. Suggesting otherwise for the purposes of supporting the organonat movement is simply disingenuous.
Hannaford Brothers’ Certified Organic Retailer designation might well be a worthwhile marketing lever. If Hannaford keeps careful track of the extra costs and invests in the right publicity and market research, they’ll be able to measure the sales and profit impact. The impact will be greater if no significant competitors adopt the designation, too. If it seems like everyone’s doing it, then there’ll be no advantage.
With all due respect, this is a major need for the supermarket industry. What took so long? Does anyone know the eating habits of the X and Y generations? Hannaford is right on!
And importantly, the trend is evidenced by the pioneers of this segment…Whole Foods and Wild Oats! Both are still functioning and profitably.
Just “Do It”, and right. Or don’t do it at all. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm
More Discussions
Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?OpenAI Names the Infrastructure Standard for Agentic Commerce
Will OpenAI or Google (or another entity) set the gold standard for agentic commerce?Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?
With all kinds of recalls on food consumers have a legitimate concern about the quality of the food they purchase. That is one of the reasons consumers choose particular stores at which they will do business. The credibility of the store and its ability to offer fresh, quality food is important to the consumer.
Whether or not that means that a certification from some organization or government body is necessary is a part of the overall question of developing trust. To keep consumers loyal, they have to trust the retailer. In some cases, certification may be an important way to develop that trust.
Much ado about nothing.
Separating organic and non-organic products has long been a challenge for retailers ever since organic products started appearing in supermarkets. Placing “like” products together has been shown to assist consumers in finding what they want more quickly, and that’s important. The standards for “certified organic retailers” appear to be quite specific and detailed, and represent a real commitment from store operations in procedures and staff training especially. This additional certification will probably only be taken on by a smaller number of supermarkets.
As long as a growing variety of organic products are available in supermarkets, I believe most consumers will be satisfied.
Retailers need to understand that consumers shop at Whole Foods for many reasons, including great merchandising. The recent rash of product recalls, in the minds of consumers, encourages organic/natural purchasing. Recent increases in organic baby food purchases are a good example. What is missed by the consumer is that there can and will be product recalls of organic/natural products. This will take some of the steam out of the growth.
Separation is only as important insofar as it make the product easier for the consumer to find organic products on the shelf.
Separate Kosher from non-Kosher and consumers understand why. Separate store brands or generics from national brands and shoppers get it. Separate displays of different grades of beef and it makes sense. Separate stunted, overpriced organic produce from the affordable good stuff and consumers applaud it.
In this discussion topic we see the continued interchangeable use of the terms “organic” and “natural,” neither of which has a generally-shared definition in the minds of shoppers. Additionally, no specific, measurable, demonstrable, or tested advantage has ever been determined for “organonat” (my newest, made-up word) products. Good for the environment? Prove it. Good for manufacturing systems? Show me. Good for my health? Some evidence, please. Good for retail? Undeniably.
Ms. Withington, the chemiphobe Hannaford shopper, will still have to ingest 38 different unorganic (not inorganic) ingredients recently approved by the FDA to be included in “certified organic” products. I wonder if she knows this or if her wonderful retailer will tell her. I also wonder if she would know a chemical if it smacked her ‘upside the head.
Here are some consumer questions about processed or packaged organonat products (herein referred to as “they”) to which I’d be interested in the responses: 1.) Do you perceive that they (e.g., Safeway’s “O” brand) are superior in flavor, nutrition, or any other way? 2.) Should (and do) they cost more and, if so, is it justified? 3.) If you bought them, how would they benefit you and your family?
On the retail side, it stands to reason that the cost of processed or packaged organonat products is higher because of the higher cost of ingredients. Retailers who integrate organonat products onto the shelf must manage shopper price comparisons by keeping organonat prices close to the other products in the category. By moving organonats to a segregated area, retailers can increase their margins to match those from other products in the category because shoppers won’t easily be able to compare prices with unorganic packaged and processed products.
By the way, recent food product recalls have nothing to do with their organic or unorganic pedigrees. The recalls address either problematic additives (to products that might even be completely organonat), or the existence of a completely organic material such as the e coli bacteria. Suggesting otherwise for the purposes of supporting the organonat movement is simply disingenuous.
Hannaford Brothers’ Certified Organic Retailer designation might well be a worthwhile marketing lever. If Hannaford keeps careful track of the extra costs and invests in the right publicity and market research, they’ll be able to measure the sales and profit impact. The impact will be greater if no significant competitors adopt the designation, too. If it seems like everyone’s doing it, then there’ll be no advantage.
With all due respect, this is a major need for the supermarket industry. What took so long? Does anyone know the eating habits of the X and Y generations? Hannaford is right on!
And importantly, the trend is evidenced by the pioneers of this segment…Whole Foods and Wild Oats! Both are still functioning and profitably.
Just “Do It”, and right. Or don’t do it at all. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm