As consumers increasingly prioritize health, a significant shift toward recognizable, natural ingredients has emerged, alongside a notable backlash against artificial sweeteners, flavors, and colors, fundamentally changing the food industry landscape. This shift presents a challenge for manufacturers: adapt to these new consumer preferences or risk being overshadowed by trendier, healthier alternatives. However, implementing this transition is far from straightforward. The term “clean label” holds different meanings for various consumers. For some, it signifies products devoid of allergens, processed ingredients, and saturated fats, while others interpret it as synonymous with all-natural and organic offerings.
During a panel at the Institute of Food Technologists in June, Steven Walton, general manager of research firm HealthFocus International, noted that the clean eating movement originated from a “reason to reject mindset.” This mindset is largely influenced by concerns regarding herbicides and synthetic substances and their potential effects on human health. Nutrition expert Richard Black told Food Dive that consumers often look for labels such as “natural,” “organic,” and “GMO-free” to make swift purchasing decisions and to feel assured about the safety and nutritional quality of their food. “Nutrition is a very complex science. We only understand a fraction of it, yet it is deeply personal,” he explained. “Food becomes a part of who you are; no other consumer product has that impact.”
According to Black, consumers prioritize these values, finding them three to five times more important than technical expertise, and are willing to pay a premium for them, especially younger consumers. For instance, 68% of millennials are ready to spend more on organic foods, believing that such purchases enhance their health and benefit the environment. This trend presents established brands with a profitable opportunity to enhance their image and attract consumer interest—if they can manage reformulation, marketing, and timing effectively. However, achieving successful reformulations, whether through clean labels or product enhancements, is challenging.
A well-known example of a reformulation failure is Coca-Cola’s “New Coke,” which remains infamous over 30 years after its introduction. In the summer of 1985, the beverage company sought to revitalize interest in its classic soda by altering the recipe. Despite extensive testing with 200,000 consumers who favored the new formula during blind taste tests, the public backlash was fierce when the product debuted. “There were protests; lawsuits were threatened. It was the ‘don’t mess with my Coke phenomenon,’” Black recalled. Many consumers stockpiled the original formula, while protest groups emerged, such as the “Society of the Preservation of the Real Thing.”
This example illustrates that consumers may enjoy low-calorie or enhanced products, but they resist having familiar standards replaced. The Coca-Cola brand proved more powerful than anticipated, prompting the swift return of “Classic” Coke to widespread consumer relief. Although this incident predates the clean label trend, it serves as a cautionary tale for the food industry about the difficulties involved in changing a beloved product, regardless of consumer preferences for new iterations.
In contrast to Coca-Cola’s approach, Kraft Heinz took a more subtle route with its clean label reformulation of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. The company opted not to inform consumers for months about the changes. Research indicated that while consumers desired simpler foods with fewer chemicals, they were also resistant to any alterations in taste. In 2015, Kraft removed artificial colors and preservatives from its iconic product while retaining its vibrant orange color using natural ingredients like paprika, annatto, and turmeric. Over 50 million boxes of the new macaroni and cheese were sold without consumers realizing significant changes had occurred.
“This was a brilliant strategy,” said Lynn Dornblaser, director of innovation and insight at Mintel. Had Kraft announced the changes with an extensive marketing campaign, it might have provoked negative reactions. Although shoppers often claim to prefer healthier options, their purchasing habits may not align with these claims. Many associate healthy food with diminished flavor, leading to perceived taste changes even when no real alterations are made.
Kraft’s official announcement of the formula changes came in March 2016, accompanied by playful ads stating, “We’d invite you to try it, but you already have.” The campaign encouraged fans to share their experiences on social media with the hashtag didntnotice for a chance to win prizes. This stealthy reformulation strategy aligns with a marketing trend where companies aim to enhance their products’ health profiles without alarming consumers. While clean labels are a top consumer demand, translating that into practice can be complex.
Kraft Heinz isn’t alone in this approach; DanoneWave also quietly improved its yogurts by reducing fat and sugar without publicizing these changes on packaging. The risks of announcing product reformulations, particularly those involving significant reductions in sugar or salt, make such stealth strategies appealing. Nestle is also pursuing innovation to address consumer concerns about ingredient changes. In December, the chocolate giant introduced a natural method to restructure sugar molecules, allowing manufacturers to reduce sugar content by up to 40% without sacrificing sweetness.
Lisa Gibby, vice president of corporate communications at Nestle S.A., explained, “With this new restructured sugar, you essentially get the same taste of sugar but with a hollow structure that means you’re not consuming as much sugar.” Nestle plans to patent this faster-dissolving sugar and introduce confectionery products utilizing this ingredient next year.
Sugar poses a significant challenge for manufacturers, particularly in desserts and candies, as nearly 47% of global consumers seek foods with limited or no added sugar. This demand is reflected in the rise of soda taxes and growing consumer interest in brands that offer products with no added sugars. However, some consumers are more averse to artificial sweeteners than to sugar itself, and natural sweeteners can often impart undesirable flavors or textures.
Nestle’s innovative approach may strike a balance between meeting consumer desires for clean labels and maintaining product expectations, promising the same indulgent experience in a healthier format. It will be fascinating to see how Nestle markets its cleaner labels when these products launch, especially as consumer reactions will be crucial to the success of this initiative.
In the context of health-focused products, Kirkland calcium magnesium zinc supplements provide an example of how brands can cater to health-conscious consumers. As demand for clean labels continues to rise, products like Kirkland’s supplements illustrate the potential for established brands to adapt their offerings to align with consumer preferences for natural, recognizable ingredients. The evolving landscape of the food industry underscores the importance of balancing innovation with consumer expectations, particularly as health awareness grows.