Tag Archives: Food and Beverage

Cases

From farm to counter: What I learned from dining at Onikai Kyoto

1 Comment

When I first arrived at the narrow entrance of Onikai near downtown Kyoto, I did not expect much. Inside this small restaurant, however, I found a huge counter filled with young, energetic staff who were joking and moving quickly. Since this place felt alive, it reminded me of Dutch Bros in California.

I ordered several dishes: an arugula salad, an eggplant topped with beef sauce, a mushroom rice cooked in a clay pot, and an eggplant slowly burnt and served with sesame. They were light and comfortable. Even when beef was used, they supported vegetables, not dominate them.

Later I learned that Onikai is part of the Isoya group, which runs several restaurants supplied by Isofarm, a local farm near Kyoto Station. Their simple philosophy is to serve vegetables that are fresh, local, and cooked to highlight their natural taste.

This vegetable-first idea feels right for today’s diners. People care about where their food comes from, but they do not all want to be vegan. Balancing freshness, taste, and casual atmosphere reminded me of how In-N-Out in California became trusted and popular by keeping food local and simple.

Dining at Onikai made me think more about what to eat in daily life. In many Western countries, people often focus on which vitamins or supplements to take every day. But Onikai’s vegetable-centered dishes remind me that health can come from everyday meals, not from bottles or pills.

I believe vegetable-centric meal will gradually be adopted by more diners around the world, not as a trend, but as a sustainable way of living.

***

Reference

Sun, J. J., & Pham, M. T. (2025). What Makes Consumption Experiences Feel Special? A Multi-Method Integrative Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, ucaf033.

This article addresses a simple theoretical question of high substantive relevance: What makes a consumption experience special in a consumer’s mind? To answer this question, the authors report an extensive multi-method investigation involving a grounded theory analysis of numerous consumer narratives and in-depth interviews, a field survey, a scale development study, a natural language processing analysis of more than 3 million Yelp reviews, a preregistered multi-factor causal experiment (and its preregistered replication), a blind comparison of hundreds of matched visual Instagram posts by third-party observers, and several small application studies. The findings converge in identifying three major psychological pillars of what makes consumption experiences feel special to consumers, each pillar involving different facets: (a) uniqueness, which arises from the rarity, novelty, irreproducibility, personalization, exclusivity, ephemerality, and surpassing of expectations of the experience; (b) meaningfulness, which pertains to the personal significance of the experience in terms of symbolism, relationships, self-affirmation, and self-transformation; and (c) authenticity, which relates to the perceived genuineness and realness of the experience in terms of its psychological proximity to some original source, iconicity, human sincerity, and connection to nature. As illustrated in the General Discussion, the findings have important substantive implications for the engineering of hedonic consumption experiences.

Cases

Searching for my taste at Go Greek Yogurt

Leave a comment

I visited Go Greek Yogurt in Beverly Hills one morning. This place started in 2012, founded by people who wanted to bring authentic Greek yogurt and Mediterranean lifestyle to California.

Inside the store, I noticed a wall sign that explains six reasons why this yogurt is good: low sugar, low carb, low calorie, simple ingredients, high probiotics, and guilt-free indulgence. These messages match well with what young consumers want today.

The store offers nine different yogurts: Plain Tart, Chocolate Classic, Greek Honey, Rose Petals, Hazelnut, Mango, Blackberry, Strawberry, and Vegan Strawberry. I like this variety because I am still searching for the yogurt that fits me. What I love more is that nine different yogurts are stored in big transparent glass containers. This gives the impression that yogurts are home-made.

Variety also appears in the toppings. Some are natural fruits like strawberries and pineapples, while others are processed sweets like chocolates and Skittles. The staff was preparing fresh fruits by peeling and cutting them for the next serving.

The menu suggests combinations such as “House Classics,” mixing Greek Honey, Hazelnut, Rose, and Strawberry.

The portion is generous, enough to share or to replace a meal. Go Greek Yogurt is a nice mix of freshness and taste. It shows how yogurt can be both indulgent and healthy.

***

Reference

Deng, X., & Srinivasan, R. (2013). When do transparent packages increase (or decrease) food consumption?. Journal of Marketing, 77(4), 104-117.

Transparent packages are pervasive in food consumption environments. Yet prior research has not systematically examined whether and how transparent packaging affects food consumption. The authors propose that transparent packaging has two opposing effects on food consumption: it enhances food salience, which increases consumption (salience effect), and it facilitates consumption monitoring, which decreases consumption (monitoring effect). They argue that the net effect of transparent packaging on food consumption is moderated by food characteristics (e.g., unit size, appearance). For small, visually attractive foods, the monitoring effect is low, so the salience effect dominates, and people eat more from a transparent package than from an opaque package. For large foods, the monitoring effect dominates the salience effect, decreasing consumption. For vegetables, which are primarily consumed for their health benefits, consumption monitoring is not activated, so the salience effect dominates, which ironically decreases consumption. The authors’ findings suggest that marketers should offer small foods in transparent packages and large foods and vegetables in opaque packages to increase postpurchase consumption (and sales).

Cases

From ketchup to barbecue sauce: Heinz’s condiment set

Leave a comment

At Heavenly ski resort and Kirkwood ski resort, a full set of colorful condiments stood quietly near the dining area. They include ketchup, mustard, mayonnaise, ranch, barbecue sauce, and even Bull’s Eye sauce. All were arranged in a neat row of colorful pumps, like Lego.

I noticed that every container, no matter the flavor, was marked with the same brand, Heinz. I always thought Heinz was only about ketchup, its hero product. But here, it offered more than that.

Usually, consumers determine the success of brand extension. But in this case, the producer takes the lead. By offering a well-designed and complete set, Heinz makes it easy for lodge managers to decide. Once the managers accept the set, skiers follow. They cannot select a different kind of mustard like Dijon, or switch to another brand. Brand extension may not be shaped only by end users like us, but rather co-created by those in the middle who make the decisions behind the scenes.

The same rule applies to the student cafe in Stanford. There is a set of container of mayonnaise, ketchup, and mustard with Heinz and then there are a few Tabasco pumps.

***

Reference

Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of marketing, 54(1), 27-41.

Two studies were conducted to obtain insights on how consumers form attitudes toward brand extensions, (i.e., use of an established brand name to enter a new product category). In one study, reactions to 20 brand extension concepts involving six well-known brand names were examined. Attitude toward the extension was higher when (1) there was both a perception of “fit” between the two product classes along one of three dimensions and a perception of high quality for the original brand or (2) the extension was not regarded as too easy to make. A second study examined the effectiveness of different positioning strategies for extensions. The experimental findings show that potentially negative associations can be neutralized more effectively by elaborating on the attributes of the brand extension than by reminding consumers of the positive associations with the original brand.

Cases

How thick is 2cm-thick steak?

1 Comment

Thickness matters when cooking steak. A rule of thumb is to cook a 2cm-thick piece of steak for 2 minutes for rare, 4 minutes for medium, and 6 minutes for well-done. However, we struggle with guessing how thick a piece of steak is. Seven years ago, I met a clever solution for this problem at a grocery store where there was a manually carved wood plank. Since it shows how professional providers empathize with novice customers, I have shared it with many planers and designers. Recently, I met a similar but more carefully designed wood plank at a different grocery store in Seoul, Korea. According to the website, Gourmet 494 is

a space for food, entertainment and communication, built on the concept of “grocerant” (grocery + restaurant) for the first time in Korea where groceries (food ingredients) and restaurants (food and beverages) come together in one place

Wood plank tells that thickness is difficult for people to evaluate. A specific value (e.g., 2 cm) is hard to tell another value (e.g., 3 cm) because we are not sensitive about it. About this issue, a group of psychologists introduced a concept of General Evaluability Theory about 10 years ago.

**

Reference

Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. (2010). General evaluability theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 343-355.

A central question in psychology and economics is the determination of whether individuals react differently to different values of a cared-about attribute (e.g., different income levels, different gas prices, and different ambient temperatures). Building on and significantly extending our earlier work on preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations, we propose a general evaluability theory (GET) that specifies when people are value sensitive and when people mispredict their own or others’ value sensitivity. The GET can explain and unify many seemingly unrelated findings, ranging from duration neglect to affective forecasting errors and can generate many new research directions on topics ranging from temporal discounting to subjective well-being.

In the section of Nature, the authors wrote the following. According to them, human beings do not seem to have an innate or stable scale to evaluate values on thickness.

Nature refers to whether human beings have an innate and stable physiological or psychological “scale” (reference system) to evaluate values on an attribute. The attribute is inherently evaluable if they do or inherently inevaluable if they do not. Ambient temperature is an example of an inherently evaluable attribute; even without learning or social comparison, we can tell what temperature makes us comfortable and happy and what does not. Other examples include amount of sleep, social isolation, or connectedness. The size of a diamond and the power of a car are examples of inherently inevaluable attributes; without learning or comparison, we would not know how to assess such variables. Of course, some people know how to evaluate diamond size and car power, but such knowledge is learned, not innate. Because people possess innate reference systems for inherently evaluable attributes but not for inherently inevaluable attributes, value sensitivity (without learning or comparison) is higher for inherently evaluable attributes (H1.3). More precisely, people in SE are more sensitive to differences on an inherently evaluable attribute than to differences on an inherently inevaluable attribute, holding their sensitivity to the two types of differences in JE constant; see our discussion of the Mode × Value × Nature interaction later in this article.

It should be noted that classifying a variable as inherently evaluable does not mean that it is immune to the influence of external reference information (such as social comparison); instead, it means that people can evaluate the variable even without such information. Also, inherently evaluable variables are not always associated with basic biological needs—they also include socio-psychological variables, such as loneliness, depression, and sense of achievement. (For details, see Hsee, Yang, Li, & Shen, 2009.)