gyn9037/Depositphotos.com
September 11, 2025
Are Grocers Still Overwhelming Shoppers with Choices?
A new survey finds more than a third (36%) of U.S. adults experience “aisle anxiety” when grocery shopping, sharing that feeling overwhelmed by different options (39%) and crowded by others (37%) sparks this feeling.
The survey of 2,000 Americans — taken in July and commissioned by herbal tea company Traditional Medicinals — further found the average shopper spends four minutes deliberating each item at the grocery store, with 71% indicating they’re trying to be more deliberate with their decisions.
A full 40% of those polled research food products more today than they did five years ago, specifically looking at claims of being “healthier for you” (38%), non-toxic or “clean” (20%), or containing no added sugar (19%). They’re also on the lookout for items that are sustainable (45%), purpose-driven (40%), and ethical (38%).
As a result, 36% consider themselves to be “product detectives” who research the items they purchase, often scrutinizing labels, packaging, and certifications to ensure they’re making informed choices. While most shoppers recognize well-known labels like organic (74%) and Fair Trade (53%), far fewer are aware of other certifications that carry equally rigorous standards — like FairWild (46%) and Fair for Life (37%).
Study Results May Indicate Consumer Awareness Regarding Certification Labels Is Mixed
Traditional Medicinals said the survey results show the importance of increasing awareness of certification labels, particularly Fair for Life or FairWild labels that are on the brand’s food packages. Jamie Horst, chief purpose officer at Traditional Medicinals, said, “When consumers see a trusted certification, it’s like a shortcut to feeling good about their decision.”
Confusion over many of the newer certification labels, however, may be another cause of anxiety.
An Acosta survey found 40% of natural and organic-focused grocery shoppers (and 50% of conventional shoppers) believe natural and organic mean the same thing, or are unsure of the difference. Among conventional shoppers, 18% don’t purchase natural and organic products because they don’t know enough about the difference, although the top reason cited for not doing so was affordability (72%).
The Paralysis of Choice Continues, But Many Popular Grocers Have Trimmed Selection
One way for grocers to reduce “choice paralysis,” as identified by psychologist Barry Schwartz’s 2004 book, “The Paradox of Choice,” is by reducing choices, although that reduces options for consumers. Many of the today’s popular grocers, including Costco, Trader Joe’s, and Aldi, only offer one or two options per category.
A 2022 article from Raconteur reported major U.K. grocers had been reducing SKUs to deliver what Asda described as a “simpler, streamlined shopping experience” for customers. However, the article also called out the risks traditional grocers face by cutting SKUs too drastically.
“All retailers are after that perfect Goldilocks scenario: not too much choice, not too little, but just the right amount. Yet there are several competing forces at play,” Bryan Roberts, founder of retail consultancy Shopfloor Insights, told Raconteur.
“Stocking fewer product lines means that there are fewer suppliers to negotiate with, fewer trucks to manage and less work to do on gap-scanning and maintaining price integrity. But it also means a reduction in lucrative listings fees from suppliers. And, if you cut the wrong things, it may even lead some shoppers to desert you,” Roberts concluded.
Discussion Questions
Is streamlining SKUs the primary tool to reducing ‘aisle anxiety’ at traditional grocery stores or are other steps more productive?
Have traditional grocery shoppers become any more or less overwhelmed by choices over the last five to 10 years?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
Carlos Arámbula
Principal, Growth Genie Partners
Nolan Wheeler
Founder and CEO, SYNQ
Cathy Hotka
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
Recent Discussions
More Discussions
Has Kroger Discovered the Limits of Automated Warehouses?
Kroger is winding down its relationship with Ocado, citing cost overruns and a reorganization of its…What Can Ross Do To Cement its Recent Success Story?
Ross has seen strong sales and projects this trend to continue. How can it best cement…Is Cyber Week Set To Smash Sales Records This Year, as Salesforce Suggests?
Salesforce suggests that Cyber Week will set records in terms of sales this year. Is this…
Most supermarkets attract a wide spread of customers, so they need to cater for a diverse range of tastes and brand preferences. That means that choice is often extensive. However, there is a balance to be struck as too many options can overwhelm shoppers – and the general direction of travel is that people want grocery shopping missions to be quicker and easier than they used to be. Excessive selection also creates inefficiency as it compresses volumes per SKU which, in turn, dilutes profitability. Good retailers curate assortments based on a clear understanding of what their customers want, and their willingness to switch between brands.
Streamlining SKUs can help reduce “aisle anxiety,” but it’s not the only—or even the most effective—solution. Shoppers are often less overwhelmed by the number of options than by how hard it is to navigate them. Clearer signage, smarter store layouts, curated sections like “top picks” or “healthy choices,” and digital tools that help compare products all make a big difference. In many cases, guiding the decision process is more powerful than simply cutting assortment.
Over the past five to ten years, shopper overwhelm has grown, not eased. Assortments have expanded, but the bigger driver is the explosion of labels and claims—organic, natural, clean, sustainable—that create confusion and slow down decision-making. Today’s grocery shopper is more deliberate, researching purchases and weighing trade-offs, which makes clarity and guidance from retailers more important than ever.
Today’s consumers are much more adventurous than they were decades ago, and stores have to be able to accommodate their desires for new SKUs. I’m guessing that longer dwell times in stores aren’t due to confusion about ingredients, but instead due to searching for the best prices. Honestly, some of those prices are not to be believed.
I think it’s both: certainly for the experienced shopper – i.e. they who know exactly what they want – logic says offering more choices is likely to satisfy more wants; but, for those who need to “deliberate”, a seeming infinity of options can be overwhelming. At least that’s the theory; the reality is likely different, as tradeoffs needs to be made and there’s a real chance some obscure SKU preempts something more popular (this is an excellent example of the limitations of a physical store vs online, since space is seldom an issue in the latter). There’s no one or simply answer here: good grocers are tuned-in to what their customers want, while those run by lessers listen too eagerly to vendor reps…and end up with 73 types of toothpaste from the same company (if not the same brand).
Your last point includes strategy decisions for CPG inside a “grocer”. Both in weighting of products stocked, and the marketing. Foods vs Stuff.
“what their customers want” vs the desire for higher margin on non perishable.
As a consumer, I’ve noticed instances where the weighting (food vs non) seems off. e.g. I’m wanting more food choice when a grocer has a small store footprint + next door (side by side) to a chain drug store.
Oddly enough, that location has the drug store now closing… but the small grocer footprint would not allow picking up even more CPG.
One of the most successful grocery store chains is Aldi. One of their strategies is simplicity, which is to limit the choices, making shopping easier. Traditionally, larger selections may seem like a benefit, but to some shoppers, so many choices create confusion, which plays out as a negative shopping experience. And many experts in sales will tout that the confused shopper won’t buy. Worse, the shopper might choose to buy somewhere else (that’s less confusing).
Check out this article about Aldi: https://inspirepreneurmagazine.com/business-case-study-how-aldi-revolutionizes-retail-with-simplicity-and-efficiency/
Agree entirely on Aldi. Aldi’s limited SKUs help shoppers, but they also help Aldi. Fewer SKUs = greater economies of scale through each + operational simplicity. That allows them to keep prices low.
Let’s make it a threesome – trio? – on up-thumbing ALDI’s success. That having been said, I doubt everyone wants to shop at an ALDI clone: blindly imitating a competior only works when the market for what they offer is unlimited. There’s a market for brands and there’s a reason for moving beyond USSR-style option limitations
We have been talking about the paradox of choice since the 80s. These days, we tend to make everything more stressful. Sure, it’s harder for grocers, but that old adage is true: the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Traditional grocers have confused product proliferation with customer service. It’s not about SKU count but choice architecture: consumers aren’t looking for infinite options (or its analogous infinite aisles), but need to have confidence in their decisions. Can traditional grocers pivot from a distributor mindset (that collects slotting fees) to a curator mindset? That translates to private labels that simplify, staff trained on recommendations, not just restocking, and layouts that guide rather than overwhelm. For traditional grocers, vendor real estate optimization needs to make way for intelligent consumer choice architecture.
Choice overload isn’t new, but shoppers today expect guidance. Helping them decode labels, claims, and compare products with signage, in-aisle cues, or digital tools can ease decision fatigue and demonstrate that a retailer really understands their needs.
I’m not convinced that reducing SKUs is the solution to aisle anxiety, especially when a broad selection of brands and products is a key competitive advantage. While it’s true that too many options can overwhelm shoppers, the broader variety can also be a strength.
A good marketer understands that the consumer shopping behavior process begins well before the consumer enters through the retailer’s doors. A product must be compelling and competitive from the outset, even before it faces competition on the retailer’s shelf.
For retailers, especially those renowned for their variety, every product placed on their shelves must have a strong advertising and promotional support program for the critical steps in the consumer’s shopping journey. This not only drives turns but also enhances the overall consumer experience.
Ultimately, reducing aisle anxiety isn’t solely a retailer’s responsibility. It requires a collaborative effort between brands and retailers to create a seamless and engaging shopping experience.
Aside from improving the layout of stores to facilitate easier navigation, improving signage to facilitate easier product identification is another effective method of reducing aisle anxiety. Furthermore, leveraging technology such as mobile apps, which provide store maps and product locations, can enhance the shopping experience for shoppers. It is also possible to alleviate stress and improve customer satisfaction by training staff to be more attentive and available for assistance.
Being in stock on the variety the shopper is looking for is critical to high satisfaction among supermarket shoppers. The challenge is that shoppers are diverse and not all of them are looking for the exact same thing. Doing the right research and monitoring product movement can help dial things in as close as possible.
More is not better, especially in assortment planning. The question really should be, what is the “right” assortment for each store and at the right time? As I learned early on, there’s no product more personal than food. Grocers need to understand the demand and product preferences for every store in every neighborhood. They need to understand the importance of specific items in each location. Having “everything for everyone” is an outdated approach to merchandising. The inventory and spoilage costs alone dictate a smarter approach to merchandising.
If retailers can execute that capability well and be nimble enough to react when things change or local customer profiles shift, then they can reduce assortments, maximize facings, and, in turn, grow incremental sales with fewer unproductive planograms and confusing customer experiences.
Grocers and most mall retailers are over-assorted these days. My local grocer has been taking fixtures off the floor for a couple of years now. They apparently don’t want to have to fill all that shelf space. That doesn’t mean they’ve reduced “aisle anxiety”. They’ve made their inventory more efficient, but shoppers, at least this shopper, are always stopping to read ingrediants and cost per ounce information. Once I’ve settled on a go-to product, shopping is easy, no matter how many sku’s I have to walk past. Grocers have abundant data telling them, sku by sku, and shelf by shelf, if they are over assorted or not. And when they find themselves to be overassorted we witness fixtures coming off the floor. How many stores, grocery or apparel or whatever, wish they had smaller footprints these days…???
Four minutes per SKU? (and presumably from the context, per trip?) I call shenanigans. I don’t need four minutes to decide which ice cream flavor to pick and that’s usually the most thought expended in my journey. Once I’ve figured out a brand / formulation / package size that works, it gets locked in; I’m not re-evaluating at every trip & when I do, it’s because the retailer is out of stock of my preferred item.
Reducing SKU’s looks good on paper. In examining the categories of products doing 80% of the sales volume, shouldn’t we then eliminate the 20% of long-tail slow selling items?! Why would we ever want to keep these items in stock, it’s costing us profit and labor?! Number crunching teams love this argument. But they miss a key element in it all.
The reason to keep long-tail items in stock is because having greater variety supports your customer perception game and go-to-market strategy. These products differentiate your store from middle-of-the-road grocers offering mostly top sellers. Shoppers know that if anyone in town has a hard to find ingredient, it’s likely the high variety store will have it. Removing customer barriers so they they don’t have to think about whether you might or might not have it is important to winning over more shoppers.
An effective assortment is curated, not rationalized.
Excess choice – especially in the form of too many sizes and price points for the same product – can add frustration to the shopping trip.
When a four-foot gondola section of mustard houses more than 100 SKUs, including a dozen package formats of one yellow mustard brand, it’s quite likely that the category management process has veered off-track.
Discovery of previously unknown brands and flavors can make grocery shopping fun and encourage new item trial. So cutting the slowest-turning items from the bottom is not always a sound approach.
Aisle anxiety due to confusing choices may be a real thing for some shoppers, but I’d bet they report it more often when they are really anxious about cost.