Abstract
This study aims to tease out why the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) have largely failed to support positive attitudinal and behavioral dietary change in the U.S. over the past decade. Dervin's sense-making methodology (SMM) is employed as a theoretical framework to postulate why DGA has not been more successful with its past communication approaches. A brief history of DGA is shared along with criticisms and literature discussing its potentially politicized nature. Thirteen semi-structured qualitative interviews with individual people and various experts (government, dietitians, communicators, and school-lunch administrators) reveal successes and failures and, ultimately, gaps in the communication process. Key themes emerged indicating the importance of mothers, coaches, and significant others, but rarely DGA, in American's nutritional upbringing. Industry expert interviews exposed areas where competing systems may cancel out efforts and how too many people are looking at narrowly focused details without seeing the big picture. Systems thinking embedded in social change theories may be advantageous over traditional, less coordinated linear-thinking approaches to improve awareness and attitudes. A systems map is proposed to guide the process and bring key parties together to move beyond the contentious, only one winner mentality that has dominated in the past. In conclusion, this article adds qualitative insights to this area of inquiry and makes suggestions to improve organizational communication and policy.