Retailers have tried unique labeling systems before and they were not embraced by consumers. They caused greater confusion. As shoppers pay greater attention to labels, manufacturers and retailers should work together to simplify food data, allowing consumers to make choices that better fit their dietary desires.

This new Raley’s system seems more user-friendly than some others but I already see some confusion in the labels. “S” to me would indicate sugar rather than no sugar. Others would benefit from a two-letter designation. The education process for Raley’s customers will be important to the understanding and usage. I applaud their effort, time will tell whether it pays off.

Trying to find these types of products in a traditional grocery store is like trying to find buried treasure, so anything that simplifies the process is welcome for those concerned about sugar, gluten, etc. The only thing Raley’s has to to do is clearly communicate with the shopper that the labels are positive, not negative — these are the products you want.

A nice idea, perhaps, but it seems awfully complicated. (And California being a litigious state, a potential source for lawsuits … no good deed goes unpunished!)

I seem to recall some store offering a “traffic signal” approach (green = “good for you” etc.) which was too simplistic, but something in between would be my suggestion. After all, nutritional info is already on the package, a supplemental system needs to improve upon that if it’s to have any value.

I am a bit surprised by some of the skeptical feedback here. This concept is nothing new and widely used by most major chains today. Publix is a great example of a well designed system (they detail it on their website). What is unique is the fact that they are not using pre-existing services from the likes of NuVal, Galdson, HowGood, healthyaisles, so maybe that could create some loyalty. I have studied consumer behavior at the biological level and think they have keyed into some great design elements here. People read very little as they shop. They are very habitual and exhibit tunnel vision. Anything that can be done to facilitate faster product identification for shoppers (that don’t read, etc.) should be a positive thing and increase basket size. Color is a required element of this approach. If I had to be critical, I would say that they could further simplify the tags. Once a customer identifies the colors they want to hunt for, they have no use for the text. Images/icons are likely better… Read more »

This is a great start! It’s all about communication and keeping it simple. If they incorporate this messaging across their marketing channels and listen to their shoppers I can see this having value. Also wouldn’t be surprised if they roll out with version 2.0 rather quickly.

I like Raley’s, but find these letters more confusing than helpful. One of the most consumer-friendly ways I’ve seen unique labeling was at Snap Kitchen in Austin (Snap has cases in some Whole Foods). Granted Snap sells meals vs. ingredients, but their cute and intuitive icons made finding the right food for your lifestyle and diet easy. A few of the icons are at this link. This approach wouldn’t work for all of grocery, but it would be nice in the prepared foods section, and could be a differentiator there.