February 6, 2008
PLBuyer: Nutritional Scoring Tool Introduced – and Challenged
Through a special arrangement, what follows is an excerpt of a current article from Private Label Buyer, presented here for discussion
Topco Associates has come out with a new nutritional new scoring system, the Overall Nutritional Quality Index (ONQI), that uses a numeric score to rate any food item or recipe. The rating system uses a complex algorithm that incorporates nearly 30 nutrient factors and expresses them via a scoring scale of 1 to 100.
ONQI was developed by a panel of a dozen health nutrition experts under the leadership of Dr. David Katz, director of the Yale University-Griffin Hospital Prevention Research Center. Plans call for introducing ONQI nationwide by the summer of 2008.
“[We’ll] be executing a comprehensive plan to bring ONQI to market,” said Steve Lauer, president and CEO of Topco. “The plan includes all the components necessary to educate consumers about ONQI, including an online presence, in-store marketing, public relations and advertising.”
Topco signed on to license the index to its members, manufacturers, restaurants and other foodservice businesses, and to promote the system through an ONQI-oriented web site. At participating grocery stores, index scores will be posted on shelf price tags under each product. Depending on manufacturer interest, the scores also may be incorporated into food packaging and labels.
“Including the ONQI score on the product package is totally voluntary,” Mr. Lauer said. “However, in the pursuit of improved public health, participating retailers will be making available to consumers all ONQI scores.”
The concept of rating food based on point values or symbols indicating healthfulness is not new to grocery retail. In fact, according to an article report published in The New York Times, “the success and popularity of other programs such as the Guiding Stars rating system from Scarborough, Maine-based Hannaford Brothers Co., Kraft’s Sensible Solutions and even Pepsico’s Smart Spot, has sparked concern in the food retail industry on how effective the various food rating systems are when compared to one another.”
So what makes ONQI different?
“ONQI was born of pure science with no commercial interests influencing its creation,” Mr. Lauer replied. “Having the ability to rate every food, beverage or recipe, and with the 1-100 ‘at-a-glance’ scoring system, ONQI is a comprehensive, independent nutritional rating system for all foods that can be applied universally. The ONQI is the only system with all these features, making it much more effective than anything else available.”
Mr. Lauer said the overall response to the concept so far has been positive.
“Retailers and manufacturers know that consumers are interested in cutting through the clutter in order to make food choices based on nutritional value,” he said. “A universal, unbiased system like the ONQI will help them do just that.”
Discussion Question: What do you think of the simplicity of QNQI’s 1-100 ‘at-a-glance’ scoring system? Is it healthy or unhealthy for the grocery industry that so many nutritional scoring systems are being developed?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Topco’s program seems okay, but so do most of the others out there. No doubt there will be still more. As for when retailers might adopt a single standard, I will again trot out my favorite little Russian saying, “When the lobster whistles on the hill.” But I wish FMI would put this on its “to do” list anyway, and at least make an effort.
Another label to confuse an already confused customer? There needs to be one universal standard that vendors subscribe to and that customers can easily understand.
It sounds like ONQI (the first thing is a new name) answers half the question. If it could be combined with some kind of “JD Powers Award” for how customers liked the product, then you would have the total answer. Consumers know that ice cream is not the best thing for them, but they don’t want to trade taste and overall satisfaction for a ho-hum experience. If you’re going to break the rules you want to really enjoy it.
Having said that, any quantitative product evaluation will help private label. By giving the consumer an unbiased measure of product quality they will be able to remove hype from their decision making. The challenge of course is that those products with a high ONQI may not be the most satisfying and those with the worse ONQI will simply not publish it. It will take a lot of effort to make people aware and responsive to this new information.
If we can keep the consumer in a constant state of anxiety over every single thing they eat, do we win?
With food scientists constantly updating and changing the different benefits that different foods offer, from vitamins & minerals to antioxidants to phytochemicals, I wonder how realistic it is to have a single score per food item. While there are those that appreciate a simple, easy to understand scoring system, sooner or later people will realize that everyone is unique and therefore will have unique needs. Regardless of the score of peanut butter, if you’re allergic, you won’t buy it.
While I believe having a dialogue about the benefits that different foods provide is the right dialogue, the final solution will likely need more than a single score system.
Seems like a candidate for government endorsement and enforcement, eventually. It looks like a way to make the nutrition facts already required actually mean something to consumers.
I observe other shoppers when I’m at the grocery store, and rarely see anyone spending time reading labels at shelf. Are they waiting until they get home to decide whether or not to consume their purchases? My own unscientific research leads me to hypothesize that a time-saving nutrition label would be a great idea. The cereal aisle is already headed in that direction.
The simplicity of the ONQI rating system, along with its being independent are appealing. Point systems offered by manufacturers could be seen as being biased.
Consumers want more information about the healthfulness of food. This system offers that opportunity. Consumer reaction will tell us whether or not ONQI will succeed.
ONQI is another business in a long history of food certification. Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, kosher and halal inspection, Guiding Stars: they’re all marketing levers used to increase sales. Given the wide variety of audiences, no single endorsement works for everyone or every product. If the fees are low, and there’s room on the label, the CPG firm can get many certifications and endorsements. There’s an apple juice brand with 2 different kosher certifications. Maybe RetailWire could run a contest: who can find the product with the most endorsements on 1 package? First prize: you have to eat it. Second prize: you have to eat more of it.
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?
Topco’s program seems okay, but so do most of the others out there. No doubt there will be still more. As for when retailers might adopt a single standard, I will again trot out my favorite little Russian saying, “When the lobster whistles on the hill.” But I wish FMI would put this on its “to do” list anyway, and at least make an effort.
Another label to confuse an already confused customer? There needs to be one universal standard that vendors subscribe to and that customers can easily understand.
It sounds like ONQI (the first thing is a new name) answers half the question. If it could be combined with some kind of “JD Powers Award” for how customers liked the product, then you would have the total answer. Consumers know that ice cream is not the best thing for them, but they don’t want to trade taste and overall satisfaction for a ho-hum experience. If you’re going to break the rules you want to really enjoy it.
Having said that, any quantitative product evaluation will help private label. By giving the consumer an unbiased measure of product quality they will be able to remove hype from their decision making. The challenge of course is that those products with a high ONQI may not be the most satisfying and those with the worse ONQI will simply not publish it. It will take a lot of effort to make people aware and responsive to this new information.
If we can keep the consumer in a constant state of anxiety over every single thing they eat, do we win?
With food scientists constantly updating and changing the different benefits that different foods offer, from vitamins & minerals to antioxidants to phytochemicals, I wonder how realistic it is to have a single score per food item. While there are those that appreciate a simple, easy to understand scoring system, sooner or later people will realize that everyone is unique and therefore will have unique needs. Regardless of the score of peanut butter, if you’re allergic, you won’t buy it.
While I believe having a dialogue about the benefits that different foods provide is the right dialogue, the final solution will likely need more than a single score system.
Seems like a candidate for government endorsement and enforcement, eventually. It looks like a way to make the nutrition facts already required actually mean something to consumers.
I observe other shoppers when I’m at the grocery store, and rarely see anyone spending time reading labels at shelf. Are they waiting until they get home to decide whether or not to consume their purchases? My own unscientific research leads me to hypothesize that a time-saving nutrition label would be a great idea. The cereal aisle is already headed in that direction.
The simplicity of the ONQI rating system, along with its being independent are appealing. Point systems offered by manufacturers could be seen as being biased.
Consumers want more information about the healthfulness of food. This system offers that opportunity. Consumer reaction will tell us whether or not ONQI will succeed.
ONQI is another business in a long history of food certification. Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, kosher and halal inspection, Guiding Stars: they’re all marketing levers used to increase sales. Given the wide variety of audiences, no single endorsement works for everyone or every product. If the fees are low, and there’s room on the label, the CPG firm can get many certifications and endorsements. There’s an apple juice brand with 2 different kosher certifications. Maybe RetailWire could run a contest: who can find the product with the most endorsements on 1 package? First prize: you have to eat it. Second prize: you have to eat more of it.