FMCG CEOs: When and Why you should hire a Black Ops team or Can you afford not to hedge your bets in the digital disruption age?

‘Companies that will take bets all along, even big bets, but not bet-the-company bets will prevail’ Jeff Bezos

In our times of transition and acceleration, an increasing number of FMCG categories are being disrupted and are about to be disrupted (cf. FMCG CEOs: 7 Things You Must Know About Direct-To-Consumer, Why Not Acting Is Not Anymore An Option and How to Go About It ). The question is no longer whether your categories will be disrupted or when will it happen but rather which companies will ultimately prevail.

The question is no longer whether your categories will be disrupted or when will it happen but rather which companies will ultimately prevail

When FMCG leaders ask for advice, I often say that the starting point is humility and a sense of urgency. Humility because there is a diversity of strategic scenarios and all the scenarios need to be put on the table. A sense of urgency because there is no time left for contemplation or inaction.

It starts with humility and a sense of urgency. Humility because there is a diversity of strategic scenarios and all scenarios need to be put on the table. A sense of urgency because there is no time left for contemplation or inaction

We all well know how hard it is to drive (self)-disruption at pace and at scale. In 1997 already, Clayton Christensen in his famous book ‘The Innovator’s Dilemma’ explained this point well. Since then, many companies have dramatically failed:

  • Kodak CEO missed the digital revolution when despite the company having invented the basics behind the digital camera in 1975, they refused to embrace it and went bankrupt in 2012
  • Blockbuster CEO refused to acquire Netflix for a mere $50mn in 2000 and filed finally for bankruptcy in 2010
  • In 1998, Google could have been acquired for a mere $1mn by Yahoo. We now know that Yahoo was sold for $4.8bn to Verizon whereas Google is now valued at $500bn
  • In 2012, Mike Dubin posted his famous video on Youtube on Dollar Shave Club. 5 years later Gillette lost 1/5th of its market share in the US and announced few weeks ago price reductions of up to 20% on its blade. The overall reducing by almost 50% the structural profitability of the category in the US (other things being equal). In the meantime, one of its largest competitors, Unilever, acquired Dollar Shave Club

More will come. This is only the beginning.

The future could have been dramatically different for these companies if their CEOs had taken different decisions. In retrospect it is easy to blame those CEOs. Most likely if we would have been in their shoes, we would have taken similar decisions based on the information available at that time. But what is left for us now is to learn from them.

Most likely if we would have been in their shoes at Kodak, Blockbuster, Yahoo…, we would have taken similar decisions based on the information available at that time. But what is left for us now is to learn from them

No one can be always 100% right, it is impossible. The issue is, in the digital disruption age, an error of judgement on a critical point can literally cost you the survival of your company and an error on just one important point can cost you billions. This is the challenge of the current landscape, one which is governed by exponential dynamics and is why it is so important to hedge your bets. Here is how:

In the digital disruption age, an error of judgement on a critical point can cost you literally the survival of your company

1. The art of identifying the Survival Questions

Great leaders do not have answers to all questions but they know how to identify the right questions. Those questions that will drive the survival or the death of their companies. That’s what I call the Survival Questions. Here are few examples:

  • What if the structural profitability on your category will be reduced by 50% as a result of lowering barriers-to-entry, increasing asymmetric competition (small players with no Wall Street reporting constraints), and increasing competition from large companies (leap-froggers as Unilever on Male Grooming). What does it imply? On your category business model? On the overall company operating model?
  • What if actually the structural profitability on your main category will trend to zero as this category will be the ultimate way for the whole industry to drive traffic for their adjacent (profitable) categories and consumer eco-system, what does it imply? On your category business model? On the overall company operating model?
  • What if the future of the Dairy industry is a ‘Winner-takes-it-all-world’ where milk farmers ship directly to consumers and where the prevailing FMCG company will manage an overall dairy eco-system (hardware, software, products, services, connected objects, platform), what will happen to our company knowing that we do not have strong direct relationship with dairy farmers?

It starts with connecting the dots of exponential dynamics (ecommerce, social media, artificial intelligence, 3D printing, block-chain…) and identifying those Survival Questions.

The question is: Is your company equipped to identify those Survival Questions? To lead the required change at pace and at scale?

The question is: Is your company equipped to identify those Survival Questions? To lead the required change at pace and at scale?

2. Business model innovation groups at the edge or at the core are useful but often NOT ENOUGH to address Survival Questions

Most FMCG companies have now set-up business model innovation groups to drive (self)-disruption. They are sometimes at the edge of the organization like in Pernod-Ricard (Breakthrough Innovation Group) and in Unilever (The Hatch House) or at the center or outside through partnering with incubators (L’Oreal Founders incubator). They are fantastic tools to innovate, overcome organizational inertia and ‘anti-bodies’, to instill a culture of experimentation, trial new business models, incubate and scale-up acquired Exponential Organizations, etc…

But such teams often operate with a ‘brief’; they are sometimes not 100% free to operate the way they want. If they want to entirely disrupt the mother company (I am not talking about incremental changes like just adding a direct-to-consumer channel there) and trial a radical business model that may well destroy 100% of the mother company’s source of profit, very often they cannot.

Additionally, such teams may be composed of your brightest and most entrepreneurial talents but at the end of the day, most have spent their entire careers in your company and they might not have all the skills to address those radical challenges alone. Many in private admit that they could do with some help to structure and steer their efforts. Many recognize that business model innovation is uncharted territory.

This is precisely why when CEOs face Survival Questions and they cannot afford to be wrong, they tend to hedge their bets, identify multiple scenarios, involve external experts and bet on all of them at the same time. That is what Cisco has been doing.

This is precisely why when CEOs face Survival Questions and they cannot afford to be wrong, they tend to hedge their bets, identify multiple scenarios, involve external experts and bet on all of them at the same time. That is what Cisco has been doing.

3. Cisco or how to hedge your bets all along

Technological companies have always operated in an environment of unpredictable standards, one in which the market can suddenly tip from one technology standard to another. At such most technological companies have been systematically hedging their strategies as Cisco has done.

As Salim Ismail explained in ‘Exponential Organizations: Why new organizations are ten times better, faster, cheaper than yours’, Cisco has always pursued a Hedging Strategy. Cisco funds new internal businesses focused on the current standard that Cisco prefers. At the same time, Sequoia Capital, its original venture capital vehicle, finances an outside team – one often staffed by former Cisco employees – which is dedicated to pursuing the competing standard. (The alternative firm has a pre-agreed-upon purchase price from Cisco in case the market tips in the other direction). In this way, Cisco covers both of its bases and maintains its agility in an uncertain marketplace.

At a time when FMCG companies are becoming increasingly like technological companies and are experiencing exponential changes in their business, having a thorough Hedging Strategy is no longer optional .

At a time when FMCG companies are becoming increasingly like technological companies and experience exponential changes in their business, having a thorough Hedging Strategy is no longer optional

4. Hiring a Black Ops Team

When CEOs face Survival Questions and there is not enough evidence to take a risk-free decision, the best option is to hire a Black Ops team to hedge the decision.

This is an extreme case but when CEOs face Survival Questions and there is not enough evidence to take a risk-free decision, the best option is to hire a Black Ops team to hedge the decision.

The traditional definition of a Black Ops team is a covert, disruptive organization that is clandestine and not attributable to the organization carrying it out. The objective becomes to explore the non-pursued decisions and to build a business with the objective to disrupt the mother company. Some companies hire a Black Ops team to complete an assessment and a war-gaming exercise. Some other companies that are on the cusp for disruption are using them to build another independent company from scratch in order to hedge their bets.

Although there is no one-size-fits-all, companies tend to hire Black Ops team when:

  • They face (or they are unsure whether they face) Survival Questions or Multi-Billion profit questions
  • The disruption is upon them (categories already ripe/vulnerable for disruption or soon to be riped)
  • The required skills and resources are not available in-house to address those risks

The bigger is the problem, the higher the sense of the urgency is and the lower the availability of the right skills and resources is, the more suited is the use of a Black Ops team.

The bigger is the problem, the higher the sense of the urgency is and the lower the availability of the right skills and resources is, the more suited is the use of a Black Ops team.

5. Forming Blue Team and Red Team

When CEOs face Survival Questions or even Multi-Billion profit questions, they usually set-up not only an internal team (Blue Team) to drive (self)-disruption but also an external team (Red Team) to challenge the internal team’s work. In this way, two perspectives are brought to the table and bets are hedged.

In this way, two perspectives are brought to the table and bets are hedged

6. The right skills (industry, entrepreneurial, strategic), the right attitude and the right governance

We still see too many Business Model Innovation Groups or internal Blue Teams struggling to reach their objectives. The reason is often because of a lack of skills and ineffective governance. The best-in-class Business Model Innovation Groups have the following in common:

  • Their teams know the company and industry well but they also include critical outsiders who are prone to challenging the industry/company holy cows
  • Beyond their own industry, they also understand all the Exponential Dynamics (Ecommerce, social media, 3D printing, last-mile-delivery technologies, blockchain, artifical intelligence…) and are able to connect the dots between them to build new business models
  • They count some entrepreneurs in the team who know what it is to start-up a business, to trial, fail, learn fast and finally to scale it up. As such, they do not try to consistently apply the big corporate booklet
  • They pursue multiple strategic scenarios in a flexible manner; they are not fixed on a single scenario
  • They have strong strategic skills, they build rigorous hypotheses and they test them relentlessly to improve their business models. They are trained in business model innovation
  • They are hungry to leave a mark and to build a legacy
  • They have the autonomy to pivot their business models and to entirely disrupt the mother company if required
  • They have in place an effective (self)-disruption governance that enables an unbiased and rapid decision taking process

Over the last 18 months, we have been assembling a team of FMCG experts, former entrepreneurs and business model innovation experts in our Zurich hub, with the objective of co-creating the future of the FMCG industry. We have been extensively interacting with leading FMCG companies.

What we see is that there are very few Business Model Innovation Groups that display the above characteristics. As we have seen from the above, the consequences of not having the right people and of not asking the right questions can be disastrous for large FMCG companies, especially for the companies with categories on the cusp for disruption: beauty, personal care, some household segments, consumer health, nutrition…

There are very few Business Model Innovation Groups that display the above characteristics. Consequences can be disastrous

What is left for us FMCG leaders is to learn from those companies (Blockbuster, Kodak, etc…) and from those categories that have been disrupted (blades & razors). It starts with displaying humility, putting all the scenarios on the table and acting with a sense of emergency as inaction and contemplation are no longer an option.

What is left for us FMCG leaders is to learn from those companies (Blockbuster, Kodak, etc…) and from those categories that have been disrupted (blades & razors). It starts with displaying humility, putting all the scenarios on the table and acting with a sense of emergency as inaction and contemplation are not anymore an option

The real question is: Do we want to be remembered in the next decade as the next Blockbuster, Kodak or Yahoo leaders or as the leaders that have successfully adapted and built new business models in the FMCG industry? It is our exciting challenge for the years to come.

The real question is: Do we want to be remembered in the next decade as the next Blockbuster, Kodak or Yahoo leaders or as the leaders that have successfully adapted and built new business models in the FMCG industry? It is our exciting challenge

As often I will close this article with the opening quote:

‘Companies that will take bets all along, even big bets, but not bet-the-company bets will prevail’ Jeff Bezos

Frederic Fernandez

To follow him, please click Here

If you are interested in discussing more on the above, you can reach out at:

frederic@fredericfernandezassociates.com

Frederic Fernandez does not own any stocks or financial instruments of any FMCG companies or companies mentioned in the above article. All the above information are public information.

About the author:

Frederic Fernandez is an expert and thought leader in the FMCG industry. He is the Managing Director and Partner of Frederic Fernandez & Associates a bespoke Strategy Consulting Firm exclusively focused on the FMCG industry. His focus areas are mainly in growth and profit turnaround, corporate strategy, direct-to-consumer and business model innovation in the FMCG industry. His passion is to help FMCG leaders co-creating the future of the industry and to develop, achieve and exceed the potential of their business. He spends his time advising Fortune 500 FMCG senior leaders globally. He is based in Zurich, Switzerland. He is also a sought-after speaker and speaks across the globe at trade associations and for corporate clients (CEO strategy meeting, yearly strategic reviews, senior management events) about the FMCG industry. Before joining the world of management consulting, he worked with Fortune 500 companies like Procter & Gamble, Reckitt Benckiser, PriceWaterhouseCoopers and Societe Generale in leadership positions across Europe (France, UK, Nordics, Germany, Switzerland, Austria), Central Africa and India.