food consumption style determines food product innovations' acceptance

Food consumption style determines foodproduct innovations’ acceptance

Kai Sparke

Area of Horticultural Economics, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Geisenheim, Germany, and

Klaus MenradStraubing Centre of Science, University of Applied Sciences of Weihenstephan-Triesdorf, Straubing, Germany

AbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a survey tool for consumer segmentation with respect to their food consumption style and to identifyinteresting consumer clusters for innovative food products development.Design/methodology/approach – The data for this research were collected in a non-stratified oral survey amongst 327 customers of food retailshops in southern Germany.Findings – Cluster analysis of the data resulted in ten different consumption style segments. Additionally, consumers’ evaluation of the food productfeatures were examined with conjoint analysis and interpreted both on a traditional preference level and on a newly elaborated acceptance level.Differences in preferences and acceptance can be observed for diverse food consumption style clusters and are the basis for target group specific foodproduct design.Research limitations/implications – The sample was limited in size but meaningful results could be obtained within the survey. Additionalimprovements can be realised in the developed survey instrument with respect to, for example, the used food consumption style descriptors, characterof product innovations or the structure of the sample.Practical implications – The developed approach can be used by food small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to integrate consumers andconsumer-related aspects in their product development and innovation activities.Originality/value – A new approach for consumer segmentation is developed within the paper and tested in a field study in Germany. A newacceptance simulator tool uses conjoint data innovatively to gather deeper consumer feedback.

Keywords Food products, Innovation, Market segmentation, Consumer behaviour, Germany

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive

readers can be found at the end of this article.

Introduction

The food industry in Germany and Europe is considered to

be a sector with comparably low research and development

(R&D) efforts. On the input side of the German food

industry, the share of expenditures for R&D was 0.23 per cent

of the total turnover in 2006. Taken as a whole, the processing

industry spends more than 2.86 per cent of the total turnover

for R&D being more than ten times higher (Federal Statistical

Office, 2008; Stifterverband fur die Deutsche Wissenschaft,

2009).Concerning the output side of food innovations there is also

significant room for improvement. New and renewed

products within the previous five years make up only 42.1

per cent of the food industry’s turnover compared to 55.7 per

cent in the whole processing industry (Stifterverband fur die

Deutsche Wissenschaft, 2009). Additionally, three of four

new food products fail on the German food and retail market

in a time period of one year after launching the products due

to listing out or insufficient sales (Menrad, 2004; Rosada,

2005).A strong market orientation, target group market research

and integration of consumers in product development

processes are identified as key factors for successful

innovation policy in the food industry (Grunert et al., 1996;

Earle et al., 2001). Prior active consumer research including

analysis of customers’ desires, trends and niches in the market

boost the likelihood of new food products to be successful

(Schmalen, 2005). Linnemann et al. (1998) propose an

integral model of food product innovation that includes steps

like analysis of market development, categorisation of

consumers regarding their preferences and perceptions and

development of adequate product assortments for several

consumer segments. Thus consumer segmentation seems to

be a suitable approach for successful target group

identification during new product development processes.

Research objective

The first objective of this research project was to develop a

survey tool that undertakes consumer segmentation in

consideration of their eating habits or food consumption

style, respectively, and thus enables an identification of those

consumer target groups that have a high openness towards

innovative food products.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm

Journal of Consumer Marketing

28/2 (2011) 125–138

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0736-3761]

[DOI 10.1108/07363761111115962]

125

Second, we aimed to better integrate consumer research

into food product development by focussing on productconcepts instead of complete products and we developed a

framework and measurement system for the evaluation ofconsumer feedback to new food product concepts.

Methodology

Consumer segmentation with regard to food

consumption

Socio-demographic attributes are often used for segmentationof consumers due to their simple ascertainability andmeasurability. But a major disadvantage is their limited

relevance for the prognosis of consumer behaviour (Meffert,2000). In contrast, Loudon and Della Bitta (1993) point out

that lifestyle and psychological-oriented approaches offerpromising opportunities regarding consumer segmentation.

The segmentation procedure of the SINUS market researchinstitute (Flaig et al., 1993) gained importance and wideimplementation in food marketing in Germany and other

European countries. It divides a population into lifestylemilieus based on people’s statements towards different aspects

of life, for example preferred products or leisure time activities.The development of the main features of our segmentation

tool was based on Brunsoe et al. (1996) and Stiess and Hayn(2005). Brunsoe et al. (1996) concentrated on cognitivecomponents of human behaviour and combined them with

several dimensions of nutrition when developing theirinstrument of a food-related lifestyle. For this purpose, ways

of shopping, cooking methods, quality aspects, consumptionsituations and buying motives were converted into statements

in a standardised questionnaire for oral interviews. Fiveconsumer clusters were obtained in Germany in this study.Stiess and Hayn (2005) used people’s purchasing and quality

orientation, cooking orientation, overall nutrition orientationand socio-demographic information for their segmentation.

Seven nutrition style clusters were gained in their analysis.The attention within our study was turned to consumers’

affinity towards food itself, and thus dimensions likepurchasing behaviour or how to prepare a meal loseimportance compared to consumers’ direct attitudes towards

certain food products. For the actors on the supply side (forexample the food industry), all the dimensions mentioned

above finally concretise into consumers’ acceptance or rejectionof offered food products at the point of sale. Our approach to

segmenting consumers may be called “food consumptionstyle”. Operationalisation of this food consumption style wasnot carried out by abstract statements about eating habits but

by concrete food products in order to diminish the surveyefforts. Choice of these food products was guided by

characteristics of the consumer segments of food-relatedlifestyle mentioned above. By means of literature review of,for example, cookbooks and food magazines, group discussion

and creative techniques, typical food products and meals werecompiled for all of these segments. They should not just

contain a “basic product”, but also symbolise potentialconsumption situations and represent trends in nutrition like

ethno-food, convenience, organic production, functional foodor regional food specialities. Finally, 13 food products andmeals were chosen to set the instrument, which should

investigate consumers’ food consumption style.Methods of imagery research were used to design the survey

tool. Imagery is regarded as quasi-sensory experiences of which

a person is consciously aware and which can exist even in the

absence of these stimulus conditions that produce the genuinesensory. Images are some kind of tools of thought that provide

a temporary representation of memories and thus can be used

in a functional way (Childers and Houston, 1983).Presenting an object in a visual manner offers diverse

advantages. Childers and Houston (1983) cite the greatervariability in the appearance of pictures compared to the

appearance of words. Holbrook (1982) states that one mightinvestigate symbolic, hedonic, emotional and aesthetic

components better with non-verbal imagery methods. Thelatter aspect is of specific relevance since food is a product that

contains utilitarian as well as emotional components.Nutritional value or requirements for preparation or

consumption may be considered in a cognitive way, whereastaste, pleasure and whether certain food products may act as a

status symbol pertain to the affective aspects. Finally, Childersand Houston (1983) emphasise the possibility of improving the

effectiveness of marketing communications using imagery. Anadvantage with respect to practical procedure in marketing

research is that images can be understood more easily by

respondents who have an inferior ability in exposure to verbalpresentations (e.g. children or foreigners).Operationalisation of food products and meals into visual

imagery stimuli was conducted in accordance with Rossiter

(1982), who advised that (coloured) pictures should containobjects that are as concrete as possible and with high imagery

content. Pictures were taken from databases with efforts toillustrate all 13 different food products and meals exactly,

attractively and in an equal way. Pictures were presented in amixed order to the respondents who were asked to assess the

attractiveness of the illustrated meals and food products tothem on a seven-point rating scale.

Evaluation of innovative food products

Product evaluation means to align and assess informationabout a really experienced or visually offered product

(Kroeber-Riel and Weinberg, 2003). When dealing withfood products that are still in the development process and

not yet launched on the market, consumers’ reaction cannotbe measured using consecutive purchase behaviour. Instead,

preferences are regarded as an important factor for thedecision-making process of consumers for food products not

available in the marketplace (Kotler et al., 2003).Conjoint analysis is considered as a suitable method for

assessment of product concepts regarding the needs of aconsumer target segment (Backhaus et al., 2003). In conjoint

analysis it is assumed that the product being assessed can bedefined in terms of few important characteristics, and

consumers’ decision related to such a product is based on

trade-offs among these product characteristics. The purposeof conjoint analysis is to estimate utility scores, so-called part

worth values, for these characteristics. Utility scores aremeasures of the weight of each single characteristic to the

interviewees’ overall preference of a product.Preference means to favour one alternative amongst others.

The part worth utilities of a conjoint analysis are based ontrade-offs thus having a comparative or relative character.

When using conjoint analysis one can derive insights into howfactor levels are assessed in comparison to each other.

However, for food product development one might beinterested in a certain product feature detached from others.

Especially in the case of target-group specific product

Food consumption style

Kai Sparke and Klaus Menrad


Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

126

development, questions arise as to how well a special new

feature performs in a certain consumer segment. This

perspective is not on relative preferences, but on absolute

acceptance. Acceptance means that a subject or object is

approved by consumers. If not, it is rejected.In contrast to measure preferences by means of conjoint

analysis, no generally applied method exists for acceptance

measurement. However, some examples can be explored in

the scientific literature based on a conjoint analysis tool. Baker

and Burnham (2001) conducted an acceptance measurement

study for food derived from genetically modified organisms

(GMO). They segmented three groups of buyers of GMO

food based on conjoint data:1 “Brand buyers”;2 “Price pickers”; and3 “Safety seekers”.

The prior ones were coded as acceptors of GMO food for a

logistic regression. However, the regression coefficient of the

variable “GMO within the food raw material” was expressed

negatively, so that one cannot speak about acceptance of

GMO food.O’Connor et al. (2005, 2006) explored the acceptance of

GMO food in two studies. They grouped consumers on the

basis of part worth utilities derived from conjoint

measurements. These product tests were about a spread or

a yogurt, respectively, made from GMO milk. A product

feature was regarded as accepted by a consumer cluster if its

mean part worth utility was higher than zero. This procedure

is coherent in terms of positive part worth utility, but only on

a group level. If a cluster’s mean is slightly above zero, there

might be many cluster members having individual part worth

utilities below zero. This is a further important discrepancy to

a fundamental acceptance concept as the purchasing decision

is made by the single consumer and not by a virtual cluster.Our own approach focuses on individual acceptance first

and refers to comparable enhancements of conjoint analysis

outcome. Green and Krieger (1988) described a market

simulator that relied on conjoint data, and said that the part

worth utilities would be the grist for a simulator mill. Part

worth utilities undergo the simulator to calculate market

shares for new products. Decision rules can be applied for

this, such as the first choice rule. In doing so, the product

alternative will be chosen that generates the largest benefit

from an individual point of view (Green and Krieger, 1988).

Thus, the choice probability for a product alternative is either

100 per cent (when it is chosen) or 0 per cent (when it is not

chosen).An acceptance simulator can be constructed in a similar

way. By means of individual part worth utilities it calculates

whether a factor level is accepted by the single consumer or

not. Every single observation for a factor level is a yes/no

decision. Thus the decision process generates a digitalisation

of utilities.The own acceptance simulator works like this. A part worth

utility enters the “mill” of the simulator and will be assessed

with 1 if it is larger than zero, and otherwise will be assessed

with 0. The formulation of this decision process is shown in

equation (1):

Acceptanceijl ¼1 for PWUijl

0 else

(; ð1Þ

where PWU is the part worth utility, i is person, j is product,

and l is factor level.This definition is conclusive as it is geared to utility theory.

If a factor level obtains a positive part worth utility in conjoint

analysis, it is in principle useful and thus acceptable. Of

course, there could be other factor levels with larger part

worth utilities, and thus the newly developed acceptance

examination is not relative but absolute and individual.After having calculated the acceptance of a product

concepts’ certain factor levels for an individual consumer by

means of this acceptance simulator, the aggregated

acceptance, for example for a consumer segment, will be

computed in the next step. This will be done according to the

first-choice rule. The number of consumers in a segment with

an acceptance value of 1 will be related to the total number of

consumers in a segment, thus deriving a percentage

acceptance value of a factor level in a consumer segment.

Overall framework and empirical procedure

A combination of visual imagery stimuli, consumers’ affective

and cognitive reactions and their evaluation of newly

developed food products results in the research framework

as shown in Figure 1.A dried fruit snack was taken to analyse consumer

preferences and acceptance and to combine them with

consumers’ food consumption style. The novelty character of

the dried fruit snack refers to its drying process with the fruit

being dried by an innovative microwave technique. This

technology results in fruit pieces of crispy consistency and

thus enables a new snack experience while there are no

deviations regarding the original fruit taste (Heindl, 2003).

Furthermore, this kind of snack serves the market mega-trend

of health and wellbeing in Germany (Heimig, 2005).Table I gives a set-up overlook of the conjoint design of the

dried fruit snack. It consisted of the factors “basic product”

which stands for the used drying technology, “fruit growing”

which differs in conventional and organic production type,

“consumption suggestion”, “final product” and “price”. As

the term “microwave dried” might sound negative to

consumers, the “reference to the drying process” was

established as another factor to evaluate potential impacts

separately. Using the statistical programme SPSS a reduced

design of 18 product cards was elaborated and presented to

the consumers. They had to make up a rating of the product

cards according to their individual preferences.In spring 2005 a consumer survey was carried out in several

hypermarkets and supermarkets in southern Germany. The

widely standardised questionnaire used for this survey

investigated consumers’ food consumption style, aimed to

evaluate the dried fruit snack presented, consumers’ previous

purchasing pattern referring to these product groups and their

information behaviour with respect to new food products

placed on the market. Additionally, some socio-demographic

information was collected from the interviewees. Consumers

evaluated 13 pictures of food products and meals, rated 18

product cards of the innovative food product and answered

other questions orally. Altogether, 327 persons were asked

about their food consumption style, of whom 155 respondents

assessed the dried fruit snack and additionally tasted some

naturally and microwave-dried apple pieces to get a gustatory

impression of the underlying basic product.




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

127

Results and findings


Assessments of the 13 food products and meals of all 327

respondents were the basis for the execution of a cluster

analysis. This procedure resulted in a ten-cluster solution. For

this number of segments the dendrogram of the clustering

process showed a still low index of heterogeneity.

Additionally, this quantity is in the dimension of cluster

solutions of Brunsoe et al. (1996) as well as Stiess and Hayn

(2005) and seemed to be manageable for preference analysis

and target group specific product design. Entitling of clusters

was based only upon evaluations of food products and meals.

Cobweb diagrams were chosen to illustrate a clusters’ food

consumption style. Figure 2 shows the orientation within the

13 different food products and meals for one of the ten

clusters. This group exhibits a high affinity towards traditional

and partly simple food and refuses exotic and modern typefood. Therefore, this cluster was entitled “Simple fare eater”.Figure 3 summarises the ten food consumption style

clusters and shows the vicinity and distance between certain

clusters. The segments “Fusion food eater”, “Junk foodeater” and “Canteen eater” were more stable than others

during the procedure, while the groups “Home-style eater”

and “Exotic food eater” are very close and would be joined

into one cluster if the number of clusters was reduced to nine.

Both groups show similar likings towards healthy, traditionaland high-quality food, but the “Exotic food eater” also

positively evaluates sushi as an example of newly introduced

foreign food. The clusters “Wholesome and conscious

connoisseurs” and “Convenient connoisseurs” would be

aggregated in a step from nine to eight segments. Both likethe spectrum from traditional food over fresh and healthy

towards delicatessen but “Convenient connoisseurs” also

favour food that needs low preparation efforts and can be

consumed quickly.After the identification of ten consumer segments, the

suitability of the developed instrument has to be assessed by

using discriminant analysis to determine which variables

discriminate between two or more groups. This enables to

choose the best suitable variables (Backhaus et al., 2003).When assigning the individual respondent to a food

consumption style cluster by means of the calculated

discriminant functions, 87.5 per cent of all persons are

assigned in the way they were grouped by cluster analysis. A

randomised procedure would result in 11.8 per cent correct

assignments. The mean discriminant coefficient of a variabledescribes how this variable discriminates between the groups

considering the calculated discriminant functions. Table II

lists the values of the mean discriminant coefficient of the 13

Figure 1 Framework of research project

Table I Set-up of the conjoint study on dried fruit snack

Factor Factor levels

Basic product Naturally dried fruit

Microwave dried fruit

Reference to drying processing No

Yes

Production type of fruit growing Conventional

Organic

Consumption suggestion Sports snack

Healthy alternative snack

Exotic treat

Final product Pure

Chocolate coated

With nut mix

Price e0.79 (low)

e1.99 (medium)

e3.19 (high)




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

128

food product and meal variables sorted by its discriminant

value.“Oysters” is the variable with the greatest importance for

discrimination, followed by “Actimel drink”, “Sushi” and

“Asparagus menu”. The variables “Salad” and “Granola”

separate worst between the consumer segments. As shown in

Figure 3, most food consumption style clusters bear likings

towards salad and granola, thus those variables do not make

the real difference between the groups.When looking at the socio-demographic background of the

different consumption style clusters (see Figure 3), a x2 test

reveals significant differences between single food

consumption style clusters. Significant differences can be

observed concerning gender and existence of children

(p , 0:05). Differences regarding respondents’ education

and age (p , 0:001) and their income (p , 0:1) are also

significant, but the share of cross table cells with an expected

frequency below 5 exceeds a level of 20 per cent.

Evaluation of innovative food products

Respondents’ individual rankings of 18 cards of product

alternatives of the dried fruit snack were the data basis for

conjoint analysis. SPSS statistical software was used to

calculate the importance of each factor and the part worth

utility values for the factor levels. Negative linearity was

implied for the factor price, because reasonably a product

with a higher price level leads to a lower benefit to the

consumer. Table III lists the importance of the factors and

part worth utilities of the factor levels for the total sample.The character of the final product gains the highest

importance, followed by price, basic product and

consumption suggestion. References to drying processing

technology and fruit growing are less important. Part worth

utilities were also aggregated for the ten food consumption

style consumer segments. The results are shown in Figure 4.

The factor price is not included as it bears no differences

between the clusters.The consumption style clusters differ significantly from

each other with regard to preferences towards product

attributes. The “Wholesome and conscious connoisseurs”

prefer organically grown fruit and the consumption suggestion

“Healthy alternative snack”. Design of the final product is less

important for this cluster, while this factor is the most

important taken together all respondents. The “Exotic food

eater” cluster favours organically grown fruit as well, and its

members like it either pure or chocolate coated. Neither

group has a previous high purchase frequency of dried fruit

snacks, since they bought dried fruit snacks less than once a

month in the past. However, they might be attracted by a

snack concept based on organic fruit. Furthermore, those two

groups show comparably little price sensibility. If they were

regarded as one group of consumers, they would amount to

about 18 per cent of all consumers, which might be sufficient

for target-group specific product development and marketing.The “Wannabe wholesome eater” and the “Wholesome and

convenient eater” are the groups with the highest previous

purchase frequency of snacks. They bought dried fruit

products around once a month. But these clusters give only

few hints about their preferences. It seems that these core

groups of dried fruit consumption do not have a strong wish

for new product ideas in the field of dried fruit snacks.The majority of consumers prefer naturally dried fruit. This

means that the new microwave drying technology might have

only a small prospect of success. Additionally, consumers do

not like references to the drying process, as they may scare

them. At a glance, a broadly accepted dried fruit snack is

based on organically grown and naturally dried fruit. It should

be mixed with nuts and advertised as an exotic treat.The outcome of the preference and acceptance comparison

is shown for the product attributes “basic product”,

“consumption suggestion” and “final product”. In addition

to the price factor, these are the product features of major

importance. The preference values are carried out as broad

bars in both positive and negative direction. The acceptance

values are illustrated as narrow bars on a 100 per cent scale.

Figure 5 depicts the results of this comparison for 4 selected

food consumption style segments.With regard to the attribute “consumption suggestion” the

picture of acceptance values is in accordance with the

preference values. The factor level “exotic treat” shows high

Figure 2 Food consumption style of “Simple fare eater”




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

129

Figure 3 Summary of the ten food consumption styles




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

130

acceptance values of about 70 per cent for three clusters.

These clusters also show positive preference values. The

“Wholesome and conscious connoisseurs” have a negative

preference value and also a low acceptance value of 35 per

cent. Similar to this, the factor level “healthy alternative

snack” reflects congruent preference and acceptance values.

The “Wholesome and conscious connoisseurs” have a positive

part worth utility and an acceptance value of 69 per cent,

whereas the other clusters show negative preference values

and acceptance values of 50 per cent and less (see Figure 5).When looking at the factor level “pure” of the final product,

one can observe deviations between preference and

acceptance values. The “Simple fare eater” shows a distinct

higher acceptance than the “Exotic food eater”, although the

latter has a superior preference value. Looking at the factor

level “naturally dried” basic product, the “Wholesome and

convenient eater” has a significant higher preference value

than the “Wholesome and conscious connoisseurs”, but their

acceptance value of 69 per cent lags behind the “Wholesome

and conscious connoisseurs” with 74 per cent. Preference and

acceptance values reveal contradictions in these cases.

Discussion and conclusions

Altogether, the survey tool used is a suitable way to examine

people’s food consumption style in a rather simple and

efficient way. However, the size of the consumption style

cluster varies clearly as listed in Figure 2. The smallest

segment, “Exotic food eater”, shares only 3.5 per cent of the

sample, whereas the largest, “Wannabe wholesome eater”,

accounts for 16.6 per cent. Small clusters might be regarded

as not being interesting for the food industry, since a product

development and marketing strategy for a small consumer

group might be only of little efficiency, but such “niche

clusters” do exist among consumers. Furthermore, the two

smallest groups – “Exotic food eaters” and “Convenient

connoisseurs” – close to other segments like “Home-style

eater” or “Wholesome and conscious connoisseurs”,

respectively, and thus could be commonly targeted in

marketing if required. Additionally, small clusters seem to

be of specific interest for target group specific product

development as their food consumption styles show likings

towards high-quality food and their socio-demographic

background additionally indicates high purchasing power.Our study design shows a number of drawbacks that make

it difficult to generalise the results without taking into account

these factors. Data collection was limited to Southern

Germany due to organisational reasons. In addition, the

sample of the survey was not drawn representatively with

respect to socio-demographic criterions due to time and

budgetary restrictions, but a balanced composition of the

sample regarding age and gender was attended during the

survey as a sample’s ex-post examination generated an overall

good fit with the results of the official regional census. Sample

size was kept small since the food consumption style tool

should be applicable for market research with limited budgets,

as is characteristic of small and medium-sized food

companies. Calculations of optimal sample sizes (Bortz,

2005), which were conducted after the survey and considered

the project’s outcome, show that single food consumption

style clusters may even consist of just less than ten individuals

without losing statistical relevance.

Table II Mean discriminant coefficients of food variables

Food product and meal variable Mean discriminant coefficient

Oysters 0.388

Actimel drink 0.375

Sushi 0.311

Asparagus menu 0.309

Takeaway sandwich and coffee 0.218

Hamburger 0.214

Grain burger 0.178

Fish fingers 0.165

Pizza 0.162

Noodles and goulash 0.155

Roast pork 0.146

Granola 0.122

Salad 0.084

Table III Preferences and part worth utilities of the tested dried fruit snack concept

Factor Importance (per cent) Factor level Part worth utility

Basic product 15.26 Naturally dried fruit 0.4806

Microwave dried fruit 20.4806

Reference to drying processing 11.14 No 0.3121

Yes 20.3121

Production type of fruit growing 9.19 Conventional 20.2873

Organic 0.2873

Consumption suggestion 13.45 Sports snack 0.0197

Healthy alternative snack 20.1752

Exotic treat 0.1555

Final product 28.73 Pure 20.1832

Chocolate coated 20.3315

With nut mix 0.5148

Price 22.23 e0.79 (low) 21.4568

e1.99 (medium) 22.9136

e3.19 (high) 4.3704




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

131

Figure

4D

ried

frui

tsn

ack

part

wor

thut

ilitie

sof

the

ten

food

cons

umpt

ion

styl

es




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

132

Figure

4Food consumption style



Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

133

Figure

5A

ccep

tanc

ean

dpr

efer

ence

valu

esof

prod

uct

feat

ures

for

sele

cted

food

cons

umpt

ion

styl

esFood consumption style



Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

134

Taking into account the food product analysed, one can

observe that the deviations cannot be totally explained by the

food consumption styles, which means that there must befurther explaining factors of consumers’ preferences. Conjoint

analysis is a widely accepted and applied instrument in

consumer research and its results can be taken as valuablenotes for product design. Further surveys and product testing

should be conducted in which the product concepts to be

tested should have a “significant” innovation level. Thisaspect was fulfilled for the dried fruit snack with the

microwave drying technology, but this technology could not

gain positive consumer reaction.Additionally, the sample size of 327 interviewees was too

small to generate significant results of cross-table analysis forsocio-demographic characteristics. Therefore a sample of

adequate size could be surveyed to obtain basic findings about

food consumption style clusters. Testing of innovative foodproducts could be conducted with smaller samples, and then

discriminant analysis is suitable to classify respondents of

these surveys into the basic food consumption styles.Beyond consumer preferences, acceptance values can be a

good feedback criterion for food manufacturers, althoughFigure 5 shows contradictions between preference and

acceptance values in some cases. The reasons for the

distortions can be found in the cluster composition:members of a cluster are similar to each other regarding

their general food consumption style, but show variance in

their product evaluation. This is particularly true for smallfood consumption styles. But in most cases of clusters and

factor levels there is coherency between preference and

acceptance values in Figure 5.

Managerial implications and applications

Bearing in mind the nearly stagnating food markets in many

European countries and the hybrid behaviour of consumers itis recommended to include consumers in early phases of food

product development, not least due to cost reasons and to

reduce the risk of product failure. In order to allow foodmanufacturers taking into account consumer requirements in

product development to a higher extent than in the past, new

easy-to-handle and reasonable tools are needed for thispurpose. The approach used in this study shows one

possibility to fulfil this requirement. Taken all together,

reducing the different dimensions of food-related lifestyles toconsumers’ affinity towards food itself and the use of images

to present the various meal options seems to be a practicable

way forward to segment consumers and use these consumerclusters in consumer-oriented food product development.

The instrument to collect information about the foodconsumption style can be easily implemented in consumer

surveys.However, the instrument needs to be further developed,

fine-tuned and checked for differing market and consumption

situations. When improving the survey tool one should think

about changing or revising some variables, for example“Salad” or “Granola”. Instead a variable that symbolises food

consumption in a person’s work context might be useful.

Many people have lunch in company or university canteens.Further on, the integration of snacks such as. sweets, ice

cream or fruit might be considered.In terms of applying target-group specific product

development the question arises as to how exalted the

acceptance value of a factor level should be, so that the

product will be successful in the selected niche or consumer

segment. To provide product developers and marketers in the

food industry with an educated guess to support theirdecisions, two acceptance categories are introduced. With

acceptance values of 60 per cent and more there is relative

certainty that a product feature is accepted within a consumersegment. High acceptance of a product feature is achieved

with acceptance values of 80 per cent and more (Sparke and

Menrad, 2008).A food company’s strategy for integrating consumers in

product development using the food consumption style

approach and the evaluation methodology could bestructured as follows: in a first step the potential target

groups are selected out of all food consumption style clusters

considering their previous purchase frequency and their

general attitude related to the product group of interest. In asecond step the target groups’ preferences towards and

acceptance of specific product features of the innovative

product concept are analysed and significant results or cleartendencies can be taken as evidences for final product design.Taking into account that own market research activities and

inclusion of consumers in product development are one of thefew success factors for product innovations in food SME

(Schmalen, 2005) such companies should increase their

know-how in this field. Many food SMEs in Germany andother European countries do not carry out any activities in

this field (Stockmeyer and Weindlmaier, 1999; Martinez and

Briz, 2000; Capitanio et al., 2009). The research framework

and the tool box for consumer segmentation and productevaluation offer affordable market research access for SMEs.

It may enable companies to enhance their market

understanding in a smart way and may trigger their newproducts’ success in the retail environment.

References

Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W. and Weiber, R.

(2003), Multivariate Analysemethoden (Multivariate AnalysisMethods), Springer, Berlin.

Baker, G.A. and Burnham, T.A. (2001), “Consumer response

to genetically modified foods: market segment analysis and

implications for producers and policy makers”, Journal onAgricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 26 No. 2,

pp. 387-403.Bortz, J. (2005), Statistik fur Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler(Statistics for Human and Social Scientists), Springer,

Heidelberg.Brunsoe, K., Grunert, K.G. and Brehdahl, L. (1996), “Ananalysis of national and cross-national consumer segments

using the food-related-lifestyle instrument in Denmark,

France, Germany and Great Britain”, Working Paper 35,MAPP, Aarhus.

Capitanio, F., Coppola, A. and Pascucci, S. (2009),

“Indications for drivers of innovation in the food sector”,British Food Journal, Vol. 111 No. 8, pp. 820-38.

Childers, T.L. and Houston, M.J. (1983), “Imagery

paradigms for consumer research: alternative perspectivesfrom cognitive psychology”, Advances in Consumer Research,Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 59-64.

Earle, M., Earle, A. and Anderson, A. (2001), Food ProductDevelopment, Woodhead Publishing Limited, Boca Raton,

FL.




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

135

Federal Statistical Office (2008), Statistical Yearbook for theFederal Republic of Germany, Federal Statistical Office,

Wiesbaden.Flaig, B.B., Meyer, T. and Ueltzhoffer, J. (1993),

Alltagsasthetik und politische Kultur (Everyday Aesthetics andPolitical Culture) (Everyday Aesthetics and Political Culture),Dietz Verlag, Bonn.

Green, P.E. and Krieger, A.M. (1988), “Choice rules and

sensitivity analysis in conjoint simulators”, Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 114-27.

Grunert, K.G., Larsen, H.H., Madsen, T.K. and Baadsgard,

A. (1996), Market Orientation in Food and Agriculture,Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA.

Heimig, D. (2005), “Gesund gesnackt” (“Healthy snacking)”,Lebensmittelzeitung, Vol. 57 No. 30, pp. 34-6.

Heindl, A. (2003), “Mikrowelle kann mehr” (“Microwave for

further performance)”, Lebensmitteltechnik, Vol. 35 Nos 1/2,pp. 60-3.

Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Some further dimensions of

psycholinguistics, imagery, and consumer response”,

Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 112-7.Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. and Wong, V. (2003),

Grundlagen des Marketing (Foundations of Marketing),Pearson Education, Munchen.

Kroeber-Riel, W. and Weinberg, P. (2003),

Konsumentenverhalten (Consumer Behavior), Vahlen Verlag,

Munchen.Linnemann, M., Meerdink, C.H., Meulenberg, M.T.G. and

Jongen, W.M.F. (1998), “Consumer-oriented technology

development”, Trends in Food Science and Technology, Vol. 9Nos 10/11, pp. 409-14.

Loudon, D.L. and Della Bitta, A.J. (1993), ConsumerBehavior: Concepts and Applications, McGraw-Hill, New

York, NY.Martinez, M.G. and Briz, J. (2000), “Innovation in the

Spanish food and drink industry”, International Food andAgribusiness Management Review, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 155-76.

Meffert, H. (2000), Marketing, Gabler, Wiesbaden.Menrad, K. (2004), “Innovations in the food industry in

Germany”, Research Policy, Vol. 33 Nos 6/7, pp. 845-78.O’Connor, E., Cowan, C., Williams, G., O’Connel, J. and

Boland, M. (2005), “Acceptance by Irish consumers of a

hypothetical GM dairy spread that reduces cholesterol”,British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 6, pp. 361-80.

O’Connor, E., Cowan, C., Williams, G., O’Connel, J. and

Boland, M. (2006), “Irish consumer acceptance of ahypothetical second-generation GM yogurt product”, FoodQuality and Preference, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 400-11.

Rosada, M. (2005), “Neueinfuhrungen zwischen Top und

Flop” (“Product launches between top and flop)”, paperpresented at the LP Innovations Congress, Bonn.

Rossiter, J.R. (1982), “Visual imagery: applications to

advertising”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 1,pp. 101-6.

Schmalen, C. (2005), Einflussfaktoren der Markteinfuhrung vonProduktinnovationen klein- und mittelstandischer Unternehmender Ernahrungsindustrie (Factors Influencing Market Entry ofProduct Innovations of Small and Medium-sized Food IndustryEnterprises), Utz, Munchen.

Sparke, K. and Menrad, K. (2008), “Dimensionen derVerbraucherresonanz bei der Neuproduktbeurteilung von

Lebensmitteln” (“Dimensions of consumer feedback within

new food product evaluation)”, Proceedings of the 47th

Annual Conference of the German Association of AgriculturalEconomists in Weihenstephan 2007, GEWISOLA,Braunschweig, pp. 53-63.

Stiess, I. and Hayn, D. (2005), “Ernahrungsstile im Alltag:Ergebnisse einer reprasentativen Untersuchung”

(“Everyday diet styles: results of a representative survey)”,working paper, ISOE Institute, Frankfurt.

Stifterverband fur die Deutsche Wissenschaft (2009), FuEDatenreport 2008. Analysen und Vergleiche (R&D Data Report2008. Analysis and Comparisons), Wissenschaftsstatistik

GmbH, Essen.Stockmeyer, B. and Weindlmaier, H. (1999),

“Produktentwicklung in der Ernahrungsindustrie –Ausgestaltung und Erfolg” (“Product development in the

food industry – organisation and success)”, Working Paper99/2, Research Centre for Milk and Food Weihenstephan,Institute for Business Management, Technical University

Munich, Freising.

About the authors

Kai Sparke is an Agricultural Economist from the TechnischeUniversitat Munchen. He was formerly a Researcher at the

Straubing Centre of Science and spent several years as aproject manager and consultant at TNS Infratest, the German

division of international market research company TNS. Heled projects for major German banks and the globally actingGerman automotive industry and was engaged in TNS’

development of new research methods. In 2010 he wasappointed Professor of Horticultural Economics at the

RheinMain University Wiesbaden Russelsheim Geisenheim.Kai Sparke is the corresponding author and can be contactedat: [email protected] Menrad has held the Professorship for Marketing and

Management at the Straubing Centre of Science and the

University of Applied Sciences of Weihenstephan-Triesdorfsince 2003. His previous professional activities include

innovation research at the Fraunhofer Institute ISI(Karlsruhe), market research in consumer products at theGfK AG (Nuremberg) and Scientific Assistant at the

University of Stuttgart-Hohenheim. He has more than 15years’ research experience in innovations in the food industry

and consumer-related aspects of innovative food products.

Executive summary and implications formanagers and executives

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executivesa rapid appreciation of the content of the article. Those with aparticular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in

toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of theresearch undertaken and its results to get the full benefit of thematerial present.

Statistics show that many new food products within the

German food and retail market fail within a year of beinglaunched. Research and development (R&D) in this sector is

seemingly a low priority throughout Europe and in Germanynew products account for only fractionally above two-fifths ofthe food industry’s turnover.Given this challenging environment, scholars have pointed

out several factors that can help food industry operators

succeed with innovative products. They suggest that




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

136

companies need to be strongly market-oriented and thorough

in their research of target consumer groups to accurately

identify their “desires, needs and niches”. Such knowledge

can then be used to involve consumers in the product

development processes. It is ultimately purported that market

analysis combined with classification of consumers based on

“preferences and perceptions” can help identify relevant

segments to target with new product offerings.Segmenting consumers is typically based on socio-

demographic attributes that are easy to identify and

measure. But different studies into consumer behaviour

have found this approach somewhat limited. It is argued

instead that a consideration of lifestyle and psychological

traits might prove more relevant for segmentation purposes.

In Germany and other European nations, different lifestyle

aspects have been widely used in relation to food marketing.

Researchers have been able to identify segments based on

responses to questions about such as product preference and

leisure time interests. Others have focused on cognitive

aspects of human behaviour together with statements

concerning such as buying motives, shopping and cooking

methods, quality aspects and consumption situations.

Combining socio-demographics with people’s orientation in

respect of these factors enabled different consumer clusters to

be formed.In the present study, Sparke and Menrad utilise and adapt

earlier models to focus more on the direct attitude of

consumers towards certain food products. The aim is to

segment individuals on the basis of their actual consumption

habits, meaning that factors like purchasing behaviour are

much less significant.Following a literature review, group discussions and creative

techniques, the authors were able to select 13 food products

to aid the identification of different consumption styles.

Choice also incorporated consumption situations and organic

production, convenience, regional variations and specialties

and other significant trends. That concrete food products

were used instead of abstract statements is another departure

from earlier work. Each of the food products chosen were

equally represented by detailed colour illustrations taken from

databases. The importance of using visual imagery as a survey

stimulus had been previously noted, while many scholars are

also aware of other advantages the approach can offer. For

instance, it is acknowledged that presenting certain

respondent groups with images rather than verbal or textual

descriptions can increase their comprehension of an issue.In the obvious absence of past purchase history, consumer

perceptions of new food products are likely to be considerably

influenced by their preferences. To identify which

characteristics survey respondents deemed important,

Sparke and Menrad deploy conjoint analysis. The

methodology is acknowledged as being appropriate for

ascertaining ideal product concepts for specific consumer

groups. Based on participant preferences, analysts are able to

compare the value of each product attribute and identifying

those which consumers perceive as most important. A

variation of this method can be used to assess the merits of

a new product characteristic in isolation from others. The aim

in such cases is to determine “absolute acceptance” rather

than “relative preferences”. However, certain studies indicate

that measurement might suggest individual rather than group

acceptance and therefore be somewhat problematical.

A consumer survey was conducted in different

supermarkets and hypermarkets in Southern Germany. The327 participants were asked to complete a questionnaire

investigating food consumption style, purchase behaviour andknowledge of new food products. In addition, they assessed

images of the 13 food products and provided somedemographic information. In order to identify consumer

preferences, around half of the respondents were also invitedto evaluate various attributes of a new dried fruit snack. This

involved rating 18 cards linked to the product, which wasmanufactured using an innovative microwave drying

technique. The opportunity to taste some dried fruit offeredthem some experience of the basic product.Analysis of the 13 food products/meals by all 327

respondents revealed various consumption style clusters.

These clusters were labelled according to their indicatedpreference for such as home-style food, canteen food, junkfood, wholesome food, convenience food or exotic food. The

authors point out similarities between home-style and exoticfood eaters and also between respondents identified as

“wholesome and conscious connoisseurs” and those in the“convenient connoisseurs” segment. Further scrutiny

revealed significant differences between certain clusters interms of gender, age, education, income and presence of

children. An examination of different variables revealedgreatest diversity in fondness for oysters, Actimel drink, sushi

and asparagus. On the other hand, salad and granola were notdifferentiating factors as most clusters expressed a liking for

these foods.Conjoint analysis was used to examine data generated by

participant ratings of cards indicating variations of the driedfruit snack. Overall, Sparke and Menrad noted that the most

important factors were the character of the final product,price, basic product and consumption suggestion. Mostconsumers prefer their fruit dried naturally or organically,

thus limiting the scope of the drying technology used here.Preferences for product attributes differed significantly

between the clusters. But similarities were evident too. Forinstance, both exotic food eaters and wholesome and

conscious connoisseurs favour organically grown fruit, arenot evidently price-sensitive and have previously exhibited low

purchase frequency of dried fruit snacks. Combined together,the two clusters account for almost one-fifth of total

respondents and Sparke and Menrad believe that scopeexists to develop and market products specifically for this

extended segment. Different sized clusters were evident andsome are especially small. Marketers might consider targeting

“niche clusters” or developing products that could appeal toother segments exhibiting comparable preferences. Evidence

suggests liking for high-quality food and considerablepurchasing power within the smaller clusters. Consequently,

the authors believe that marketers have genuine opportunitiesto develop products specifically for such groups.As indicated in the literature, the authors found some

contradictions between the preference values and acceptancevalues when comparing certain consumption styles for some

product attributes. Segment member variance in productevaluation despite similarity of consumption style was cited as

a possible reason for this.Food SMEs are urged to incorporate consumption style

into product development. The suggested approach is toselect a potential target group from the different styles

identified and consider purchase history and attitude towards




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

137

the product group in question. Analysis of preference and

acceptance indications of specific attributes can then shape

final product design. Some minor adjustments might improve

the methodology deployed. Revision of the variables included

to represent food consumed in contexts like the workplace is

one idea, while studies could also include snacks such as

sweets, ice cream or fruit. It is also pointed out that

researchers should assume that a product attribute is likely to

be approved within a consumer segment only whenacceptance values register above a certain percentage.The likelihood exists that factors in addition to

consumption style influence consumer preferences andfurther investigation is therefore recommended.

(A precis of the article “Food consumption style determines foodproduct innovations’ acceptance”. Supplied by MarketingConsultants for Emerald.)




Volume 28 · Number 2 · 2011 · 125–138

138

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

food consumption style determines food product innovations' acceptance

Documents