Creating a decision-ready case for the innovation arm of a global CPG company

A consistent pattern had emerged across multiple projects. Different internal audiences were asking different questions, but the team was often relying on one standard version of the story. Without a clear narrative showing what would change in the P&L, why the investment mattered, and who should own it, promising opportunities lost momentum.

Some projects risked missing the internal window altogether. The issue was usually not the underlying technology. It was that the investment case, ownership model, and funding path were not yet clear enough for internal decision makers to move.

1. Building a repeatable decision framework

Across five major projects, we used a consistent approach. We started with the next decision the business needed to make, then built models that linked the external technology or partnership to commercial outcomes and the P&L. Assumptions were made explicit so Finance and Purchasing could challenge them without breaking the underlying logic. We also clarified the investment required, who might fund it internally, and how the story needed to change depending on the audience. The objective was to turn each opportunity into a decision-ready case rather than a promising but incomplete concept.

2. Turning individual opportunities into finance-grade business cases

For single-business-unit opportunities, we supported projects ranging from next-generation ingredients in premium portfolios to new line extensions built around external discovery capabilities. In each case, we combined market and commercial diligence with a clearer business case covering demand assumptions, pricing and mix logic, cost changes, investment requirements, and payback potential. We also helped frame what the external partner would provide, what internal teams would need to execute, and what a practical launch path could look like.

This helped shift internal discussions away from narrow concerns around higher unit cost and toward a broader view of value creation over time. It also made it easier for business leaders to understand why an initiative was worth backing and what would need to be true for it to scale.

3. Structuring platform and cross-business-unit opportunities

For broader opportunities spanning multiple business units, we developed platform-style business cases that showed why a central investment could be more effective than repeating fragmented efforts inside different parts of the company. We defined working models for intake, prioritisation, development, and handoff, and quantified both near-term opportunity and longer-term capability value.

In some cases, we built the early business case for new data-driven capabilities and framed proof-of-concept work around commercial outcomes and ROI. In others, we created strategic blueprints for cross-brand platforms, including prioritisation methods, validation steps, and clearer definitions of what different internal teams would need to fund and own at each stage. This helped turn scattered opportunities into more structured internal programs with clearer ownership and funding paths.

4. Tailoring the story for internal alignment

A key part of the work was adapting the same core case for different internal audiences. For business group heads, the focus was on payback, trade-offs, and what it would take to scale. For category leaders, it was portfolio fit, timing, and risk. For Finance and Purchasing, it was cost mechanics, assumptions, and sensitivities. For technical teams, it was what needed to be proven and what each stage of proof would unlock.

This reduced friction because discussions started from what each audience actually cared about instead of forcing one generic narrative across every conversation. It also increased speed by reducing the number of cycles lost to misaligned questions and incomplete decision materials.