Innovation & Disruption
Speakers who examine how industries are reshaped — and how organisations can lead rather than follow change
The largest consumer goods companies spend over a billion dollars annually on product innovation and see no measurable sales return. When retailers grow more powerful and private label erodes margins, the strategies that built a brand’s market position stop defending it. Knowing where to invest and how to negotiate the manufacturer-retailer relationship from strength has become the defining commercial challenge for FMCG leadership.
Most organisations treat new ideas as intellectual problems – to be argued over, refined, and approved before anyone acts on them. That process is not a filter for bad ideas; it is a filter for action. The companies that build new things do not have better ideas. They have better discipline around testing the ones they have.
Most organisations know what the safer option is. They choose the familiar one anyway. When procurement systems, regulatory bodies, and established manufacturers benefit from the status quo, a better solution can sit unused for decades.
Most organisations plan as if the future is a continuation of the present, only faster. The future they actually face is shaped by turning points, unexpected shocks, and ideas that arrive from outside the industry. Long-range thinking is rarely a discipline inside the leadership team, which leaves strategy exposed to events that were predictable to almost no one in the room.
Large, multi-year programmes fail less often on technology than on coordination. The risk sits in holding a coalition of governments, suppliers and scientific egos together long enough to deliver, and in recovering credibility when something visible goes wrong. Most leadership models assume conditions far simpler than this.
Growth businesses fail more often than they scale, and the reasons sit closer to ordinary management discipline than to strategy. Founders raise money, hire the wrong people, mistake activity for traction, and discover late that the controls were never built. Senior leaders inside larger companies face the inverse problem: how to back, integrate or learn from the entrepreneurs they fund or acquire, without importing the chaos.
Strategy decks rarely fail on the page. They fail in the gap between intent and the daily behaviour of the people meant to execute. Senior teams know what good looks like, yet under pressure they default to the habits that built the current performance ceiling, not the ones required to move beyond it.
Strategy built for national markets and capital-intensive competition is now a liability, not a framework. Urbanisation, the feminisation of skilled workforces, and the structural erosion of imitation as viable strategy have redrawn the competitive map. The organisations that grasp this shift first will set the terms of the next era of competition – not manage its consequences.
Most brands compete on rational benefits and end up interchangeable. Loyalty thins, price pressure rises, marketing budgets get cut first. The harder question for any commercial leader is what makes a customer feel something strong enough to choose you again when the cheaper option is one tap away.
Brands are investing heavily in digital experience and AI-driven personalisation, yet emotional loyalty is declining. Modern consumers – especially Gen Z and Gen Alpha – judge brands not by service quality but by authenticity, community, and belonging. Most leadership teams can describe their customer experience; almost none can explain why their customers stay.
Most large organisations no longer compete on capital, scale or process. They compete on whether they can attract scarce talent, generate ideas competitors cannot copy, and build an identity customers actively choose. The strategic question on the table is not how to be more efficient. It is how to be different in a way that pays.