Design Thinking and Food Innovation

This paper presents a new approach for food innovation—a Design Thinking approach that challenges the strong product orientation that still exists in the food industry. Consumer researchers widely believe that innovation in the food sector can be much more user oriented. Fork to Farm projects try to maximize value creation for the end user, but; unfortunately; many of these projects appeals to an undifferentiated mass market. The food industry needs to understand individual consumers and the context in which they live to be able to deliver successful new food solutions. The aim of this paper is to discuss and exemplify how Design Thinking can contribute to innovation in the food industry.After introducing the Design Thinking approach and describing an innovation project conducted within the seafood industry in Norway, four specific aspects of Design Thinking: a) Begin at the beginning, b) Take a human-centered approach, c) Try early and often, and d) Seek outside help, are discussed in more detail. I conclude that Design Thinking is a faster and cheaper way to include the voice of the consumer into the process —a learning approach that needs to be further discussed, improved and tested out within the food domain

Food safety myths consequences for health: A study of reported gastroenteritis incidence and prevalence in UK, Norway and Germany

Food safety beliefs are not always science based. In this study, we aim to contribute to the state of the art of food safety knowledge by investigating unscientific beliefs consequences for gastroenteritis. After collecting food safety myths across Europe, we conducted a web-based survey on a representative sample of consumers from UK, Germany and Norway (N = 3110) to investigate what food safety myths people believe to be true, and if these beliefs influence gastroenteritis incidences and prevalence. The results show that a large share of the population believe in food safety myths, in the worst cases more than 70% report to believe myths to be facts and believing in many of these myths correlates positively with gastroenteritis incidences and prevalence. The largest correlations are observed for unscientific beliefs about eggs (such as storing eggs at room temperature and eating raw eggs to cure hangover), bacteria inactivation (that a wooden cutting board, and chili, wasabi and marinades kills bacteria), that vegetarians don't get food poisoning, and that eating dirt and having a diarrhea is good since it cleans up the stomach. In the discussion, we explain the negative consequences by linking the food safety myths to science-based food safety knowledge. This is the first study linking unscientific beliefs to gastroenteritis. Future studies need to investigate the mechanisms explaining why beliefs in food safety myths correlate with gastroenteritis incidences and prevalence. Studies investigating behavior change methods, including but not limited to correcting false beliefs are also needed.acceptedVersio

Perceived usefulness of design thinking activities for transforming research to impact.

Empirical studies that investigate the effect of design thinking within complex contexts involving multiple stakeholders are rare. The aim of this study is to contribute to the literature on design thinking, by investigating the perceived usefulness of including design thinking activities into a complex research project for food safety. A survey was distributed to all participants in SafeConsume, a Horizon 2020 research project, to measure perceived usefulness of design thinking activities such as collaborative workshops, visualization tools and empathic observation studies. Bivariate correlations and one-way ANOVAs were conducted in JMP Pro 14. The results indicate that design thinking activities may be useful also for large food safety projects. Multidisciplinary collaborative workshops can generate optimism and a sense of belonging among the participants, visualization tools can contribute to simplify complex information, and empathic observation studies makes it easier to think user centric. This study is one of few that quantitatively investigate the perceived usefulness of implementing design thinking into a multidisciplinary research project, and the findings contribute to a better understanding of the perceived effects of implementing design thinking into a large complex food safety research projects.Perceived usefulness of design thinking activities for transforming research to impact.publishedVersio

Food risk communication to consumers: The scare of antibiotic resistant bacteria in chicken

In 2014 a food scare following a report on antibiotic resistant bacteria in chicken fillets led to a dramatic drop in sales of chicken. Actors in the food chain as well as the authorities were unprepared for the consequences of the case. The study investigated how risk communicators coped with the crisis through in-depth interviews with 14 relevant actors. The case study illustrated how delayed risk communication from authorities opened for stakeholders with contradictory views and other agendas. Further, although the risk communicators were aware of the concept of risk perception, they may not truly acknowledge the power triggering emotions

Composition of Collaborative Innovation Networks: An Investigation of Process Characteristics and Outcomes

In this study we test how different ways of composing collaborative action networks influence food innovation. Networks have received considerable attention in the literature and are perceived to enhance the likelihood of innovation success by overcoming resource and capability deficiencies. While previous studies of collaborate innovation in the food sector have been mostly qualitative case studies of one or a few networks, we compare 96 networks which were all structured according to the same network template. After content-analysing archive data, we estimated a vector-generalised linear model with binomial response distributions and probit link functions; with network composition as the predictor and the innovation process charateristics and outcomes as response variables. Our findings show that differently composed manufacturer networks lead to different outcomes and different process characteristics. We find that strong management and coordination of activities are more important for heterogeneous manufacturer networks than for homogeneous manufacturer networks, and that vertically composed networks with suppliers contribute to efficiency gains to a higher extent than networks consisting solely of manufacturers

Food Scares: Reflections and Reactions

2014, a researcher from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health stated in a newspaper interview that she never touched chicken with her bare hands. This interview was the beginning of a media storm, which resulted in a 25% sales drop for chicken within three months. To be able to understand why this interview had such a strong effect, we conducted an explorative case study. Findings from previous studies of food safety behavior indicate that consumers are irrational and that information is not enough to change behavior. Gigerenzer (2015), however, argue in a recent article that the claim that people are hardly educable lacks evidence. He cites Simon (1985) quote that “people are generally quite rational; that is, they usually have reasons for what they do” and claims that teaching people to become risk savvy is a true alternative to nudging.The aim of our study is to shed light on the rationality debate by exploring consumers’ reflections and reactions to the previously mentioned food scare article. Data from five focus-group interviews with Norwegian consumers of chicken were transcribed, content analyzed, and in-vitro coded, before we conducted a multiple correspondence analysis in PAST. We developed a graphical plot of our results, which we visually inspected and interpreted. The findings indicate that consumers do reflect when confronted with food scares. Some question the research behind the news, others wonder how dangerous this food scare is compared to other risks. Consumers are not irrational, even though their emotions co-occur more often with their behavior than their reflections

A trans disciplinary and multi actor approach to develop high impact food safety messages to consumers: Time for a revision of the WHO - Five keys to safer food?

publishedVersionacceptedVersio

Comparing internal and alliance-based new product development processes: case studies in the food industry

Companies may simultaneously pursue different new product development (NPD) strategies. This article reports a comparative two case design study of in-house NPD projects as well as alliance based NPD projects in a food company. Two contradicting proposition’s of the efficiency of NPD in an alliance compared to NPD performed internally are stated, and the findings indicate that the alliance based NPD solution creates a better context for NPD than the in-house solution. Less forwarding of unsolved problems between the departments and a better communication is observed within the alliance. The observed pattern may be interpreted in terms of the framework developed by evolutionary economics, which states that what a firm can do is mainly determined by its organizationally embedded routines. We propose that the observed differences are explained by in-house routine failure, and highlight the importance of including routines when investigating the efficiency of new product development in alliances

Social norms and risk communication

Social norms are beliefs about what people in general would consider appropriate behaviour in a particular social context. In this mini-review, we summarise research on the role of social norms in the context of safe food handling practices. We review existing evidence regarding the influence of social norms on food handling practices related to cross-contamination and hygiene, time-temperature control and adequate cooking. Furthermore, we discuss the consequences of biases in social norms and how they might be mitigated by norm-oriented risk communication messages. Finally, we discuss potential conflicts between norms that are instrumental for safe food handling practices and norms that are instrumental for maintaining social relationships, and suggest directions for future researchacceptedVersio