Business Strategy & Growth
Strategists, economists and entrepreneurs who help organisations identify opportunity and execute with conviction
Building a premium brand is straightforward when conditions are favourable. Sustaining it under investor pressure, economic disruption, and the erosion of the founding proposition is where most founder visions fracture. Leaders in luxury and premium sectors face a specific tension: the distinctiveness that created the brand’s value is precisely what commercial scale tends to erode – and when that anchor is lost, no amount of distribution can recover it.
Consumer brands built on taste and authority are now competing in an attention economy that rewards volume over judgement. Leaders running them have to protect a point of view while opening the business to new audiences, new formats, and harder commercial targets. Few have done that at the front of a cultural title for 25 years and can say with evidence what actually works.
Most challenger brands stall somewhere between a clever first product and the hard work of national distribution, repeat purchase, and defending shelf space against incumbents with vastly larger marketing budgets. The question is rarely the idea. It is whether a small team can sequence product, channel, cash, and brand with enough discipline to keep moving when the well-funded competitor finally notices.
Every established organisation faces the same structural trap: the systems that make it excellent today are precisely what prevent it from building what it needs tomorrow. Budget cycles, governance structures, and talent incentives are designed to protect the core – not to fund the experiments that will eventually replace it. The problem is not a lack of innovation ambition; it is the absence of a working architecture that lets both agendas run simultaneously, with different logic, without one destroying the other.
Most companies fall in love with their solution before they have proved the problem is worth solving. The result is launched products no one needs, growth plans that stall at the pilot stage, and innovation portfolios that consume capital without producing category leaders. Senior teams need a discipline for finding problems large enough to justify the work, and the conviction to abandon the rest.
Most consumer brands and media businesses are competing for attention in a market where attention is collapsing in value. The instinct is to chase scale, lower price, and platform reach. The harder question is whether a brand can build a paying audience that treats it as essential, in print, in physical retail, and in formats the rest of the industry has written off.
Most enterprises have run AI pilots. Far fewer have moved AI into the operating fabric of how decisions are made, deals get done, and software gets bought. The gap is not technology. It is a leadership problem about which workflows to redesign, which vendors actually deliver, and how to read the buyer signals coming back through the data.
Big incumbent businesses do not usually fail because their strategy is wrong. They fail because the senior team has stopped trusting itself, capital is leaving, and the next ninety days will set what is recoverable. Boards in that position need a chair who has lived the same fight, made the unpopular call, and brought a fatigued workforce back.
Most large organisations are designed to execute existing business models. The structures and incentives that make execution efficient are the same ones that make serious innovation almost impossible to deploy at scale. The result is innovation theatre: pilots, labs and accelerators that produce activity without changing the operating reality of the company.