Q: Could the new milk jug adopted by Wal-mart be the beginning of an era where environmental concerns take precedence over consumer preferences?
| posted by Fast Company staff
Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, and Costco have adopted a newly designed gallon milk jug.
Pros: cheaper shipping (the new shape takes up less space), lower costs (at Sam's Club costs have gone from $2.18 to $2.58 a gallon), fresher milk and more eco-friendly (no milk crates necessary and water use is reduced.)
Cons: messy spills (no spout), hard to pour.
Interestingly, supermarkets have pledged to continue using the new milk jug, despite consumers who aren't quite happy with it.
I don't necessarily think this means we are entering an era in which environmental concerns take priority over consumer preferences – although in this case it seems that way. Rather, we're entering an era in which most products will start being designed keeping both environmental concerns and user friendliness in mind. Achieving both is what's key and here's where there will be plenty of scope for innovative ideas. This version of the milk jug will not be the last – it will keep being improved upon. How about a spout that pops out when pressed, or a separately retailed, more durable spout that fits neatly into a hole in the jug and that people buy just once and then hang on to?
Not if they stumble out of the gate like new milk jug. The news I saw showed the jug leaking and interviewed a few people who think the idea is silly. Remember: "You don't get a second chance to make a first impression." Randy
Why don't we just use cartons, like they do in Europe? (French Milk Carton) Or like the rectangular soy milk cartons? Why do we have to have excess and have gallons of milk anyway? Seriously though, we'd probably be better off having the delivery guy come with the bottles of milk, and when we're done we clean them, put them out on the porch for pickup, and then they're reused. Of course this doesn't solve the transportation side of this issue. It only speaks to packaging side of the equation. But there's probably a solution for the use of oil too -- the delivery guy can use a scooter or something.
The driver here is not the environment, its handling and logistics: far less restocking; no need to create a reverse distribution system for the crates; reduced washing/heating/drying/chemicals/water-treatment for the crates; fewer trucks and therefore less energy and carbon associated with each gallon of shipped milk. The environment is a beneficiary, but not the driver. How Wal-Mart sells it to consumers is through lower costs - costs that will stay lower vs all less efficient systems. The greatest benefits and cost savings will flow to Wal-Mart.
Sadly, it is the beginning of a larger movement. There have been previous green packaging redesigns, but with Wal-Mart's participation this packaging trend will probably continue. More on this in my blog.
In my eyes, Wal-Mart has always been the Big Bad Wolf, a corporate institution that is emblematic of all that is wrong and soul-less in this world. A bit harsh, perhaps. But any time Wal-Mart adopts a green practice and then decides to stick to it (even at the expense of some consumers!), I have to stand up and applaud. Sure, this is probably cost-effective and self-interested, but so what? Wal-Mart and Poland Spring have set great examples for Green Packaging, and I hope more companies follow suit. The jugs may be a lousy pour, but the milk stain on my shirt makes me feel Green.
Why do we have to choose? I don't see why both needs can't be satisfied with an improved design that is both environmentally responsible and attractive to consumers.
That this happens to be a bad design does not mean that business efficiency and the related energy savings are at odds with consumer needs. Wal-Mart incorrectly assumes that customers will roll over for whatever business practices they adopt. Consumers have been and will continue to be accommodating to businesses who seek some efficiency, whether it's a 'green' effect or just good business sense. When it's a bad idea or design and it's done for purely selfish motives though, expect market failure.
Share your ideas
10 Total
July 2, 2008 at 12:24pm
Saabira ChaudhuriWal-Mart, Sam's Club, and Costco have adopted a newly designed gallon milk jug.
Pros: cheaper shipping (the new shape takes up less space), lower costs (at Sam's Club costs have gone from $2.18 to $2.58 a gallon), fresher milk and more eco-friendly (no milk crates necessary and water use is reduced.)
Cons: messy spills (no spout), hard to pour.
Interestingly, supermarkets have pledged to continue using the new milk jug, despite consumers who aren't quite happy with it.
I don't necessarily think this means we are entering an era in which environmental concerns take priority over consumer preferences – although in this case it seems that way. Rather, we're entering an era in which most products will start being designed keeping both environmental concerns and user friendliness in mind. Achieving both is what's key and here's where there will be plenty of scope for innovative ideas. This version of the milk jug will not be the last – it will keep being improved upon. How about a spout that pops out when pressed, or a separately retailed, more durable spout that fits neatly into a hole in the jug and that people buy just once and then hang on to?
Here's a picture of the new jug.
July 2, 2008 at 12:34pm
Carel Two-EagleIt's possible, if enough consumers insist on it.
July 2, 2008 at 12:48pm
Randy McCartyNot if they stumble out of the gate like new milk jug. The news I saw showed the jug leaking and interviewed a few people who think the idea is silly. Remember: "You don't get a second chance to make a first impression." Randy
July 2, 2008 at 1:22pm
Lynne d JohnsonWhy don't we just use cartons, like they do in Europe? (French Milk Carton) Or like the rectangular soy milk cartons? Why do we have to have excess and have gallons of milk anyway? Seriously though, we'd probably be better off having the delivery guy come with the bottles of milk, and when we're done we clean them, put them out on the porch for pickup, and then they're reused. Of course this doesn't solve the transportation side of this issue. It only speaks to packaging side of the equation. But there's probably a solution for the use of oil too -- the delivery guy can use a scooter or something.
I just saw a CBS video of this new jug, and it really doesn't look like a smart idea.
July 2, 2008 at 2:41pm
Nie RenThe driver here is not the environment, its handling and logistics: far less restocking; no need to create a reverse distribution system for the crates; reduced washing/heating/drying/chemicals/water-treatment for the crates; fewer trucks and therefore less energy and carbon associated with each gallon of shipped milk. The environment is a beneficiary, but not the driver. How Wal-Mart sells it to consumers is through lower costs - costs that will stay lower vs all less efficient systems. The greatest benefits and cost savings will flow to Wal-Mart.
July 2, 2008 at 3:21pm
Kevin OhannessianSadly, it is the beginning of a larger movement. There have been previous green packaging redesigns, but with Wal-Mart's participation this packaging trend will probably continue. More on this in my blog.
July 2, 2008 at 3:58pm
Rip EmpsonIn my eyes, Wal-Mart has always been the Big Bad Wolf, a corporate institution that is emblematic of all that is wrong and soul-less in this world. A bit harsh, perhaps. But any time Wal-Mart adopts a green practice and then decides to stick to it (even at the expense of some consumers!), I have to stand up and applaud. Sure, this is probably cost-effective and self-interested, but so what? Wal-Mart and Poland Spring have set great examples for Green Packaging, and I hope more companies follow suit. The jugs may be a lousy pour, but the milk stain on my shirt makes me feel Green.
July 2, 2008 at 7:42pm
kenneth ringgoldSUV's were a consumer preference not to long ago & look what happened to our gas situation. It is about time we all become more "green".
July 2, 2008 at 9:24pm
Susan BesemerWhy do we have to choose? I don't see why both needs can't be satisfied with an improved design that is both environmentally responsible and attractive to consumers.
July 2, 2008 at 11:40pm
Dorn LynchThat this happens to be a bad design does not mean that business efficiency and the related energy savings are at odds with consumer needs. Wal-Mart incorrectly assumes that customers will roll over for whatever business practices they adopt. Consumers have been and will continue to be accommodating to businesses who seek some efficiency, whether it's a 'green' effect or just good business sense. When it's a bad idea or design and it's done for purely selfish motives though, expect market failure.
Share your ideas