More from the Author

• Technical Note | HBS Case Collection | December 2017 (Revised April 2018)

  A Note on the Snack Food Industry

  David Bell, Kerry Herman and Amram Migdal

  This note provides an overview of the snacking industry in 2017.

  Keywords: Agribusiness; Food; Food and Beverage Industry; United States; Europe; Asia; China; Latin America; Middle East;

  Citation:

  Bell, David, Kerry Herman, and Amram Migdal. "A Note on the Snack Food Industry." Harvard Business School Technical Note 518-064, December 2017. (Revised April 2018.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | December 2017 (Revised March 2018)

  Kellogg Company/eighteen94 capital

  David Bell, Damien McLoughlin and Natalie Kindred

  With 33,000 employees and revenues of $13 billion in 2016, Kellogg Company was the world’s largest producer of branded packaged cereal and a leader in branded convenience foods. Founded in 1906 and based in Michigan, the company had a proud history of product and marketing innovation starting with its first product, Kellogg’s Toasted Corn Flakes, which created the cold cereal category. In recent years, however, Kellogg’s revenue had declined due to a number of factors, including changing consumer tastes, increased competition, and evolving advertising trends and sales channels. Seeing innovation as a key to future success, in 2016 the company established eighteen94 capital, its corporate venture capital arm, which had announced investments in three startups as of late 2017. eighteen94 was conceived as a platform for giving Kellogg access to the kinds of skills, products, and ingredients that could help drive future growth. It was also a vehicle for changing mindsets and culture by reviving the entrepreneurial spirit that some felt had eroded within Kellogg. This case allows students to consider what sort of impact on internal culture and behavior Kellogg should expect from eighteen94 in its current form. Does eighteen94 have the potential to drive the kind of changes and benefits that Kellogg needs?

  Keywords: CPG; consumer packaged goods; cereal; Battle Creek; Michigan; breakfast; snack; food; Agribusiness; change management; growth strategy; venture capital; Corporate Venture Capital; innovation; Startup; brand; Brand ＆ product management; advertising; Demand and Consumers; Innovation and Invention; Venture Capital; Food; Brands and Branding; Marketing; Agriculture and Agribusiness Industry; Food and Beverage Industry; Consumer Products Industry; United States; Michigan; North America;

  Citation:

  Bell, David, Damien McLoughlin, and Natalie Kindred. "Kellogg Company/eighteen94 capital." Harvard Business School Case 518-061, December 2017. (Revised March 2018.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | December 2017 (Revised January 2018)

  Alltech

  David E. Bell and Natalie Kindred

  Alltech was a Lexington, Kentucky-based producer of supplements for animal feed, with revenues of over $2 billion (projected to reach $3 billion in 2018), sales in 120 countries, 5,000 employees, and 100 manufacturing plants worldwide. For nearly four decades, Alltech had been defined by its focus on innovation and marketing as well as the entrepreneurial spirit and vision of its founder, Dr. Pearse Lyons, who remained intimately involved in company operations and in managing relationships with key customers. This case finds Alltech in the midst of a new growth strategy—downstream integration, specifically buying up feed companies—which marked a stark departure from the company’s longtime emphasis on organic growth. The decision to buy feed companies had been controversial within Alltech: feed was a low-margin, rather traditional commodity business, while Alltech earned relatively high margins on products rooted in science and innovation. However, Lyons believed downstream integration would allow Alltech to better communicate with its end customers (farmers), increase sales of its supplements, and help protect the firm from industry dynamics such as consolidation and cost pressure. Was he right, or should Alltech take a different approach?

  Keywords: Alltech; United States; Agribusiness; Agriculture; animal; animal agriculture; animal feed; livestock; family business; Vertical Integration; strategy; Growth; feed additives; feed supplements; Kentucky; growth strategy; Family businesses; Animal-Based Agribusiness; Acquisition; Business Growth and Maturation; Business Model; Change Management; Trends; Governance; Entrepreneurship; Growth and Development; Intellectual Property; Leadership; Management; Markets; Organizational Culture; Private Ownership; Science; Quality; Risk and Uncertainty; Research; Sales; Agriculture and Agribusiness Industry; Pharmaceutical Industry; United States; Kentucky; Brazil; China;

  Citation:

  Bell, David E., and Natalie Kindred. "Alltech." Harvard Business School Case 518-001, December 2017. (Revised January 2018.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related