Address

(Tower 2, Level 20, Darling Park)

201 Sussex Street

Sydney, NSW, 2000 Australia

Get in touch
Follow us
The Myth of the 'Hero Leader' in FMCG: Why Collaboration is Key to Success.
Debbie Morrison • April 19, 2023

The Consumer Goods industry is a highly innovative, competitive and fast-paced sector that demands leaders who can navigate complex challenges and drive results. 


Innovation and creativity are the driving force behind food & beverage excellence but they can also be a double-edged sword. Elevating innovative mavericks and individual leaders as saviours who can lead companies to glory, spawns the notion of the ‘hero leader’ - a single individual who possesses all the necessary skills and expertise to safeguard company success.


In reality, this notion couldn’t be further from the truth. We all love a hero - Ben Affleck's new movie ‘Air’ epitomises this - a story based on monetizing an amazing basketball player on the rise, whose athleticism and fame could function as a self-sustaining advertisement for an ever-expanding product line. But like the real story, one-man missions to rescue a company's fortunes from the brink of disaster belong back in the 80s. Collaboration is the key to success in FMCG, and leaders who prioritise cooperation and teamwork over individual heroics are better equipped to achieve sustained success.


The ‘Hero’ Myth

To understand why collaboration is critical in FMCG, we must first explore the reasons why the hero leader myth persists. One reason is the tendency to attribute success to a single individual rather than to a team effort. This is often reinforced by the media's portrayal of successful business leaders as charismatic and larger-than-life figures. However, this overlooks the importance of collaboration and teamwork in driving successful outcomes. In fact, research suggests that teams outperform individuals in a range of tasks, from decision-making to problem-solving.


In reality, the FMCG industry is constantly evolving, with ever-changing consumer preferences and a constant need for innovation. This can create a sense of urgency and a focus on short-term results, which may lead some leaders to adopt an authoritarian approach. However, this approach can stifle creativity and hinder collaboration, ultimately leading to burnout and high employee turnover.


On the other hand, leaders who prioritise collaboration can create an environment that fosters innovation, creativity, and long-term success. By bringing together diverse perspectives and skill sets, teams can identify new opportunities and develop effective solutions to complex challenges. When employees feel valued and heard, they are more likely to be engaged and committed to the success of the company. Therefore, collaboration is essential for sustained success in the FMCG industry.


One example of successful collaboration in FMCG is Procter & Gamble (P&G). P&G is known for its open and collaborative culture, which has enabled the company to develop innovative products that meet the needs of its customers. For example, the company's Swiffer product was the result of collaboration between P&G's R&D team and a group of designers and engineers from IDEO, a design firm. By working together, they were able to create a product that addressed a common cleaning challenge in a new and innovative way.


Another example is Unilever, which has made sustainability a key priority in its business strategy. By collaborating with stakeholders such as suppliers, NGOs, and consumers, Unilever has been able to develop innovative solutions that reduce its environmental footprint and create long-term value for the company. For example, the company's "Project Sunlight" initiative aims to create a brighter future for children by improving health and hygiene, reducing environmental impact, and enhancing livelihoods. This initiative has been successful in part because it has engaged a wide range of stakeholders in its development and implementation.


In addition to these examples, research supports the idea that collaboration is key to success in FMCG. A study by
McKinsey & Company found that companies with more diverse leadership teams and a collaborative culture were more likely to outperform their peers. Additionally, a study by Deloitte found that organisations with a strong culture of collaboration were more agile and better able to adapt to change.


Collaboration: The Necessary Anti-Hero

So, how can leaders foster a culture of collaboration in their organisations? One important step is to model collaborative behaviour themselves. When leaders demonstrate a willingness to listen to diverse perspectives and to work collaboratively with others, they set an example for their employees to follow. Additionally, leaders can create structures and processes that support collaboration, such as cross-functional teams, regular team-building activities, and open communication channels.


The myth of the hero leader in FMCG is just that - a myth. While individual leadership is important, collaboration and teamwork are essential to achieving sustained success in the fast-paced and competitive FMCG industry. Rather than prioritising authoritarian or top-down approaches, leaders who prioritise collaboration create an environment that fosters innovation, creativity, and long-term success.


By bringing together diverse perspectives and skill sets, teams can identify new opportunities and develop effective solutions to complex challenges. Companies like Procter & Gamble and Unilever are examples of successful collaboration in action, where they have been able to develop innovative products and sustainability initiatives by working closely with stakeholders.

Research also supports the idea that collaboration is key to success in FMCG, as companies with more diverse leadership teams and a collaborative culture were found to outperform their peers.


To foster a culture of collaboration, leaders must model collaborative behaviour themselves and create structures and processes that support collaboration, such as cross-functional teams and open communication channels.


The hero leader myth must be debunked in the FMCG industry. Collaboration, not individual heroics, is the key to sustained success in this fast-paced and competitive industry. By prioritising collaboration, leaders can create an environment that fosters innovation, creativity, and long-term success for their company and its stakeholders.


At
ELR Executive, we specialise in helping FMCG and Food & Beverage companies identify and hire leaders who value collaboration and have the skills to bring together diverse perspectives and skill sets to drive successful business outcomes. They understand that successful collaboration requires strong communication skills, empathy, and the ability to build trust and respect across teams. With a focus on finding executives who possess these qualities, ELR Executive can help FMCG companies build high-performing teams that are able to navigate complex challenges and drive sustainable growth.


If you'd like to learn more about how we can help you hire the right leadership talent, who can navigate your business forward, securing its competitive advantage to thrive in today’s challenging business environment,
speak to us today.

By John Elliott April 6, 2025
Comfort has become the silent killer of executive performance. In an era defined by disruption, volatility, and shrinking margins, too many leadership teams are still optimising for control, not adaptability. They talk about transformation, but build cultures of stability. They prize clarity, yet avoid the ambiguity where real growth lives. The problem isn’t capability. It’s discomfort intolerance. The solution? Start hiring and promoting leaders who deliberately seek discomfort—not just those who can tolerate it when it arrives. Growth Mindset Isn’t Enough Anymore You’ve heard the term "growth mindset" countless times. It’s become a leadership cliché. But it’s not wrong—it’s just incomplete. A growth mindset says, "I believe I can learn." Discomfort-driven leadership says, "I will actively seek out the hardest experiences because that’s where I’ll grow fastest." The distinction matters. Leaders with a growth mindset tend to thrive when external change forces them to adapt. But leaders who embrace discomfort create those conditions on purpose. They invite hard feedback. They question their own success. They take action before external pressure arrives. According to a 2023 study by Deloitte, only 22% of executives say their leadership team is “very prepared” for the future—despite record spending on transformation programmes (Deloitte Human Capital Trends, 2023). That gap exists because most teams are trained to manage change , not lead into uncertainty . Ask yourself: Are you hiring leaders who wait for disruption—or ones who walk towards it? Discomfort Is the Driver of Strategic Advantage Companies don’t fall behind because they make bad decisions. They fall behind because their leaders avoid the hard ones. In high-stakes industries like FMCG, where regulatory pressure, margin compression, and shifting consumer loyalty are accelerating, comfort is dangerous. It fosters: Short-termism Decision paralysis Lack of innovation Cultural stagnation McKinsey found that organisations with a strong tolerance for ambiguity—where leaders frequently challenge their own assumptions—are 2.4x more likely to be top-quartile performers on total shareholder returns (McKinsey & Company, 2022). In other words: embracing discomfort isn’t a trait—it’s a multiplier. Let’s take an example. When COVID hit, Lion Brewery—one of Australia's largest beer producers—was forced to rethink logistics and supply overnight. But smaller craft breweries who had already diversified through direct-to-consumer models adapted faster. Why? Their founders had already been operating in discomfort. They were trained for volatility. What Discomfort-Driven Leaders Actually Do Differently You can spot these leaders. They don’t always look like the most confident in the room—but they’re always the most effective in a storm. They: Seek feedback from critics, not fans Prioritise strategy over popularity Tackle underperformance head-on—even if it means conflict Ask hard questions that slow down groupthink Regularly step out of their functional lane to challenge assumptions They also act . Not rashly—but decisively. In a recent Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) survey, directors ranked “resilience and adaptability” as the #1 trait they now seek in new appointments—outranking experience for the first time (AICD, 2024). That’s not a trend. It’s a shift in what leadership now demands. The Real Cost of Hiring for Comfort Not hiring discomfort-driven leaders isn’t just a missed opportunity—it’s a risk. Here’s what it’s costing you: Strategic Drift: Without challenge, strategies become stale. Your team optimises yesterday’s model. Talent Exodus: Top performers disengage when they see leadership avoiding tough calls. Innovation Bottlenecks: Safe cultures don’t take smart risks. New ideas die in committee. Crisis Fragility: Leaders who haven’t been tested won’t perform when stakes are high. Bain & Company found that companies with decision-making cultures built around speed and tension—not consensus—were 95% more likely to deliver sustained value creation (Bain, 2023). Ask yourself: Is your executive team equipped for bold calls—or just built for calm waters? How to Identify Discomfort-Driven Leaders in Interviews Everyone talks a good game in interviews. But few have the scar tissue that comes from operating in real discomfort. The trick is to go beyond surface-level success stories. Here’s how: Ask Better Questions: “What’s the most uncomfortable decision you’ve made in the last 12 months—and how did it play out?” “Tell me about a time you got strong pushback from your team. What did you do?” “What’s a belief you held strongly that you’ve now abandoned?” “When have you chosen a path that was harder in the short term, but better long term?” Look for: Specificity (vagueness = theory, not lived experience) Self-awareness without self-promotion Signs of humility: they talk about learning, not just winning Evidence of risk-taking: role changes, cross-functional moves, or failed experiments Pro tip: Ask referees how the leader handles ambiguity. Not just performance. This will tell you more about how they lead under pressure. What to Do Now: Practical Actions for Executive Teams If you want to build a leadership culture of discomfort, you have to engineer it. It won’t happen organically in high-performing, risk-averse teams. Here’s how to start: Audit Your Current Team: When was the last time each leader took on something that scared them? Rethink Talent Criteria: Shift from stability and experience to adaptability and action under pressure. Redesign Development: Stretch your execs with ambiguous, cross-functional challenges—not just workshops. Model It at the Top: If the CEO isn’t embracing discomfort, no one else will. You don’t need to create chaos. You just need to stop insulating your leaders from discomfort—and start asking them to seek it. The Discomfort Dividend You can’t build a future-ready business with comfort-first leadership. The next generation of strategic advantage will come not from better processes or faster tech—but from bolder human decisions. From leaders who are willing to feel awkward, wrong, or out of their depth—because they know that’s where the value is. So next time you're hiring a leader, ask yourself: Are they looking for clarity—or ready to lead without it? Do they want the role—or are they ready for the risk that comes with it? Are they seeking comfort—or prepared to create discomfort for progress? Because in 2025, comfort is a luxury your business can’t afford .
By John Elliott March 24, 2025
Emotional intelligence is one of the most valued traits in executive leadership today.  It’s also one of the most misunderstood. In interviews, every candidate knows how to speak about empathy, collaboration, and “bringing people on the journey.” But when does that emotional intelligence start to look more like emotional avoidance? If you’re hiring into a senior role in consumer goods or food and beverage manufacturing, this distinction matters. Hiring someone who avoids hard conversations risks building a culture that performs around problems, not through them. The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2025 understand how to build trust and rapport — without dodging the accountability that comes with real leadership. Emotional Intelligence: What It Gets Right In complex, fast-paced industries like FMCG and food production, leaders need more than technical expertise. They must influence, de-escalate tension, manage change, and build alignment across functions. That’s where emotional intelligence shines. High-EQ leaders are more likely to: Retain talent through strong, trust-based relationships Remain composed in high-stakes environments Reduce conflict through proactive, clear communication Drive psychological safety while still pushing for results The research backs this up. According to a 2024 EHL Insights report , emotionally intelligent leaders improve employee satisfaction, engagement, and collaboration — all essential in manufacturing settings where coordination between departments is critical. But there’s a fine line between emotional intelligence and emotional overcorrection. When Emotional Intelligence Becomes Emotional Avoidance The risk is subtle: leaders who over-index on empathy may begin to avoid the discomfort of conflict altogether. That looks like: Letting underperformance linger to “keep the peace” Over-relying on collaboration instead of making firm decisions Avoiding direct feedback Prioritising harmony at the expense of clarity A 2024 Forbes article described how emotionally avoidant leaders — despite good intentions — often undermine the very culture they’re trying to protect. Accountability erodes, decisions slow down, and high performers become disengaged. We’ve seen this play out in executive search mandates across the sector. On paper, a candidate may appear ideal: emotionally intelligent, highly personable, well-liked. But dig deeper, and a pattern emerges — reluctance to address performance issues, vague language around past team challenges, and a track record of avoiding direct confrontation. That’s not emotional intelligence. That’s fear, dressed as empathy. Emotional Intelligence Is a Must — But It’s Not the Full Picture More organisations are making emotional intelligence a key leadership trait in hiring — and for good reason. In high-change environments, emotionally intelligent leaders: Build trust across teams quickly Navigate transformation without losing people along the way Stay composed under pressure Handle interpersonal complexity with clarity But some of the most costly mis-hires we see come from leaders who present as highly empathetic, but struggle to lead through tension. Not because they lack EQ — but because they confuse it with keeping everyone comfortable. The difference? The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2024 and 2025 are doing both: Holding people accountable while building engagement Delivering hard feedback without defensiveness Balancing calm with courage These are the leaders who retain high performers, protect standards, and still earn trust across the business. Hiring Outcomes Are Better When EQ Is Tested in Context The most effective hiring processes we’re seeing in the market today aren’t just asking, “Is this leader emotionally intelligent?” They’re asking: Can this person hold accountability and empathy at the same time? Have they delivered under pressure without letting performance slide? Do they create safe cultures that are also high-performing? The difference in outcomes is clear: More resilient leadership teams Better cultural fit Fewer surprises post-placement What to Look for in Executive Interviews Hiring emotionally intelligent leaders isn’t just about what they say — it’s about how they’ve acted in real moments of challenge. The most effective hiring panels are getting beyond rehearsed narratives by asking sharper questions: To probe real emotional intelligence: “Tell me about a time you had to lead a team through a change that wasn’t popular.” “How do you approach a conversation when someone on your team is underperforming?” “Describe a time you disagreed with your CEO or board. What did you do?” Watch for signals: Are they clear and specific, or vague and diplomatic? Do they show respect and resolve? Do they accept responsibility, or redirect it elsewhere? In reference checks, ask: “How did they manage pressure or uncertainty?” “Were they able to deliver difficult feedback directly?” “Did they avoid difficult decisions in the name of team cohesion?” When emotional intelligence is genuine, it shows up in results — not just relationships. Why This Matters Now Organisations in the consumer goods and food manufacturing sectors are undergoing constant disruption — from digitisation to regulatory shifts to cost pressures. In this environment, leadership soft skills aren’t optional. But it’s not enough to hire likeable leaders. The ones delivering real impact are those who bring empathy and edge. They’re able to sit with discomfort, hold the mirror up, and still bring people with them. That’s what true emotional intelligence looks like in 2025. So when you’re hiring your next senior leader, don’t just ask if they care. Ask if they can care and confront — with courage, with clarity, and with conviction. Because your culture doesn’t need more harmony. It needs more truth.
Share by: