Ben, a product manager at SunRise Juice Co., is having a hard time choosing the wording for a new ready-made fruit smoothie product. The company's senior management wants him to use the phrase "no sugar added" on the smoothie's bottle, but Ben isn't so sure. Technically, the statement is true—there's no sugar added to the smoothie. However, there are 35 grams of naturally occurring sugars from the fruit in each smoothie drink. Ben thinks the phrase "no sugar added" may be misleading for health-conscious consumers who are looking for low-sugar products. What do you think? What should Ben do?

Explanation:

I think Ben is right. Even though the statement is technically correct, it may mislead customers.

Customers may interpret the phrase "no sugar added" as if the product did not contain any sugar.

Thus, customers interested in drinking beverages without sugar at all might think  they are "safe" consuming the smoothie beverage, when in reallity each smoothie's bottle contains sugar 35 g of naturally occurring sugars from the fruit.

Customers deserve to be certain on what they are buying, thus the labels must be a sincere help for them, and not ambiguos at all.

This is a "gray zone" and an example of what in ethics is called a dilema.

I think the decision should be shared by a wider team and based on some research.

I think Ben should encourage the Senior Management to call a multidisciplynary meeting, where the subject is widely discussed. Also, I would suggest Ben to do some research, look for precedents about labeling  in the industry, and try to learn the opinion of the FDA about this sensitive matter.

answer; functional fixedness;