Packaging flop? Sainsbury’s vacuum-packed beef puts material reduction and convenience in conflict

13 Jun 2023 --- Sainsbury’s is the second-largest supermarket chain in the UK, and positive consumer perception is a major part of its success. However, things went wrong when the brand changed its minced beef trays to vacuum packs to reduce material use.

Packaging reduction strategy
Many retailers have announced various measures to operate more sustainably. At Sainsbury’s, that means conscious cutbacks on plastic packaging. So far, the chain has eliminated single-use plastic lids from containers of sour cream, yogurt and similar items, gotten rid of black plastic packaging from ready-to-eat meals and stopped using loose plastic bags for produce and bakery items.

The matter at hand here, though, is that the company became the first retailer in the UK to swap plastic trays for vacuum packaging on all its minced beef products. According to a report on its website, it will save 450 metric tons of plastic annually, representing a significant change. However, not all customers were ready for it, and some used social media to discuss their outrage.

Poor consumer perception
Being the first to do something differently always comes with risks, and this strategy had a swift blowback from some purchasers. Much of the negative consumer perception centered on usability and how the new packaging changed the meat’s texture and appearance.

Slab of sustainability? Sainsbury’s vacuum packs reduce material use but impact consumer convenience (Image credit: Twitter/simmo1024).Consumers complained about the product’s gray color and how the texture was more like a brick than a consumable item. Relatedly, people reported having to hit it vigorously with a spoon to get it to break up properly in the pan during cooking. Some also mentioned how the packaging squashed the meat and made it hard to remove.

However, the story is not so clear-cut if you read customer feedback on Sainsbury’s website. The brand’s British or Irish 5% Fat Beef Mince 500-gram package had over 900 reviews at the time of writing. Some consumers were furious about the change and said they’d start buying elsewhere. 

Others had a more balanced view. Even when complaining about the texture, they frequently said it tasted the same as they expected. Some reviewers even gave tips about how to break it up in the pan when cooking, saying it wasn’t too hard and was a small price to pay for helping the environment.

Notably, many of the positive reviews that mentioned the new packaging came from people who’d received complimentary products by being part of the brand’s testing program. That’s not to say the feedback had false or misleading information. However, individuals who received free products may have felt more forgiving of shortcomings than those who paid full price for the mince.

Not widely recycled?
Sainsbury’s reportedly made £29.46 billion (US$37 billion) between 2021-2022. That sales volume highlights why the brand can’t please everyone with any decision: the target market is too vast. Even so, in the eyes of some, that doesn’t mean all the choices made were the right ones.

However, a particularly problematic aspect of the new packaging is that people have claimed it’s harder to recycle than previous versions. Sian Sutherland, co-founder of the anti-plastic advocacy group A Plastic Planet, clarified some of the positive and negative implications of the new packaging in an April 2023 news report for BBC. 

“While there will be a saving in the weight of plastic used, switching to flexible plastics over rigid ones is no more green than changing from a petrol to a diesel vehicle,” she said. Sutherland continued by saying flexible packaging is virtually impossible to recycle, especially when food remnants contaminate it.Many of the positive reviews came from consumers who’d received complimentary products through Sainsbury’s testing program.

She then compared the former plastic trays for the mince to the new vacuum packaging: “The old, rigid plastic packaging would at least have gone into recycling, however limited the UK’s systems are. The new vacuum packs will instead be thrown into general waste and end up in incineration.”

Eco-conscious consumers are more likely to purchase products with clear recycling instructions on the packaging. However, many individuals agree it’s too hard to get clarification on how to recycle products. That’s troubling, particularly because many people won’t make an effort if the general consumer perception is that there are too many barriers.

Other perspectives
All company leaders must evaluate various factors when making any packaging changes. For example, how would new materials or a different design impact the bottom line? They ask that question beyond whether alterations cause such a marked change in consumer perception that many start buying products elsewhere.

Many large brands track internal metrics that could affect decisions about proposed changes. For example, some manufacturers evaluate overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) within their factories. While the ideal is to have the highest OEE possible, many manufacturers achieve an OEE of 60%-85%, reports Reliable Plant.

Plus, it’s important to note that not all customers were upset across the board. According to Sky News, some consumers felt the change was relatively minor and praised the supermarket chain for trying new things to help the environment.

Columnist Mike Rampton at I News UK also proposed that if people are turned off by how the product now looks in the vacuum packaging, they should consider eating less meat. “While the aesthetics of vacuum-packed meat might leave a lot to be desired, it’s not like uncompressed mince is notably pretty,” he said.

Rampton continued: “The way things currently are is simply not sustainable. We urgently need to cut down on plastic, meat or ideally both. So, if you aren’t willing to go along with the version of mince that involves less plastic, maybe you should eat less meat.”According to Innova Market Insights, 26% of UK consumers say reduced material use positively influences their purchasing decisions

Sainsbury’s responds
Meanwhile, Richard Crampton, director of fresh food at Sainsbury’s, asserted that the vacuum-packed mince products are identical except for the packaging. He also told the Guardian that vacuum packing requires people to use a different cooking style for the first minute after putting the mince in the pan, as it requires more stirring. The packaging and shelving at Sainsbury’s now more clearly states that change.

However, Crampton said the brand would stick with the new packaging due to its corporate and moral values. He also clarified the change had not caused an uptick in calls to the company’s customer support line, nor had it resulted in market share or sales drops.

Key takeaways
Sainsbury’s is one of several supermarket leaders working to reduce plastic packaging. Many people resist changes, so those alterations won’t always go smoothly. It’s also important to gauge how many individuals are so incensed by the new packaging that they’ll buy elsewhere. 

But social media posts are not always good indicators of how the broader public feels because many people only share their views on those platforms when feeling particularly strongly about an issue.

Only company executives will have the data telling them if this packaging change causes a long-term downturn. If it doesn’t, they will probably stick to the new vacuum-packing approach, even if not everyone is happy.

Testing the product with a relatively small segment – as Sainsbury’s seems to have done here – is the right move. The feedback generated often accurately represents what to expect regarding consumer perception.

By Emily Newton

This feature is provided by Food Ingredients First’s sister website, Packaging Insights.

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com