Pressure Points: Edition 2

1. Supply chain resilience requires C-suite oversight

What happened

Kraft Heinz is overhauling its global operating structure, consolidating procurement and supply chain into a single central function led by newly appointed Global Chief Procurement and Supply Chain Officer Janelle Aydin from July 1, 2026. The company’s new CEO Steve Cahillane is explicitly redirecting strategy towards operational efficiency and supply chain resilience as inflation and logistics costs squeeze industry margins.

Our POV

In an era when food inflation and sporadic shortages have eroded trust, treating supply chain as the guardian of everyday reliability is a competitive differentiator, not just an internal efficiency play. Leading FMCG players are turning the supply chain function into a board level growth, risk and brand trust engine – bringing procurement, resilience and sustainability under one strategic leader to protect price, availability and brand equity in a volatile world. Investors will also increasingly value this kind of organizational resilience

Now what?

Treat your supply chain leadership structure as a strategic design decision. Reexamine whether procurement, supply and sustainability are fragmented across functions; consolidation can sharpen accountability for margin resilience and consumer trust when shocks hit. Use this re-architecture moment to set new KPIs that matter to consumers – on-shelf availability, price stability and sustainability of sourcing – rather than only internal efficiency metrics. With global annual cost to retail of stockouts estimated at $1.2 trillion, the case for taking action is compelling.

2. Digital product passports offer new business models

3. Extreme heat is becoming an infrastructure cost

What happened

Extreme temperatures around the world are exposing the growing economic costs of operating in a hotter climate. Eurostar has reportedly revised specifications for its new £1.7 billion (c. $2.3 billion) fleet of Channel Tunnel trains so they can operate in temperatures of up to 55°C (131°F), reflecting more extreme summer conditions and future climate projections. Meanwhile, retailers including Uniqlo, Greggs and Marks & Spencer have reported operational disruption linked to extreme heat, from store closures to refrigeration failures and reviews of future cooling requirements. Others like H&M are adapting ranges to account for hotter weather lasting longer throughout the year.

Our POV

Businesses increasingly see the commercial opportunity in helping consumers and communities adapt to extreme weather. But adaptation is also becoming a major infrastructure cost. Companies are being forced to redesign assets, buildings, supply chains and operating models around climate resilience, often decades before those investments would normally have been required.

We may be entering an era where a growing share of investment is devoted not to improving productivity or customer experience, but simply maintaining current levels of performance under changing environmental conditions. A growing ecosystem of specialist firms is emerging to help organizations quantify climate adaptation financially, treating resilience as a business investment decision. Anticipate a significant “adaptation economy” spanning transport, retail, construction, real estate, energy, cooling, insurance and urban infrastructure.

While some businesses face rising cooling, maintenance and resilience costs, others are discovering new opportunities as changing weather patterns reshape demand and even agricultural suitability. Recent UK soft fruit harvests have benefited from hotter conditions, even reducing the country’s headline inflation rate, illustrating how climate change can redistribute economic advantage rather than simply destroy it.

Now what?

Start treating extreme heat as a baseline operating condition. Which assets, buildings, supply chains and customer experiences were designed for a cooler climate – and what investment will be needed simply to keep them functioning as expected over the next 10-20 years? At the same time, don’t overlook areas of growth and strategic opportunity in key sectors and regions as the winners and losers of climate change become more apparent.

4. Pink-collar economy highlights the role of female spending

What happened

Recent analysis of US labor market data suggests that, since the beginning of President Trump’s second term at the start of 2025, around 86% of net new payroll jobs have gone to women. During the same period, women have edged into the majority of non-farm payroll employment for the first time. Analysis suggests this is not because employers are suddenly favoring female workers, but because the sectors adding jobs are disproportionately female-dominated. Healthcare- and education-related services alone have added more than 800,000 jobs, while male-dominated sectors have shrunk.

Our POV

These findings challenge one of the dominant economic narratives of recent years. Political attention remains focused on manufacturing revival, industrial policy and reshoring. Yet the labor market continues to create jobs elsewhere – healthcare, care services, education and other people-centered sectors. As societies become wealthier, older and more productive, labor increasingly shifts from making things to looking after people. Many of these sectors are also among the hardest to automate, offshore or fully replace with AI. This suggests future growth, spending power and labor demand may increasingly sit within what has traditionally been considered the “pink-collar” economy.

Now what?

5. Brand equity matters more, not less, in the age of agentic AI

What happened

Agentic AI was a dominant theme at Cannes Lion, with platforms and brands like Amazon and Papa Johns exploring a future where consumers increasingly delegate decision-making to AI assistants – from researching to comparing and buying on their behalf. Big global brands are investing heavily in agentic AI, with PepsiCo, for example, aiming to be an agentic-AI first business in 2026. Meanwhile, CMO surveys show that AI powers 24.2% of all marketing activities — nearly double the 13.1% recorded in 2024. However, only 6% of companies are deemed to be high performers who are extracting real AI value. And while marketing budgets have remained flat since 2022, the greater focus on AI means traditional marketing and brand-building activities are squeezed.

Our POV

The concern for leaders is that “branding bypass” becomes a reality, with brand choice determined purely by how visible it is in AI platforms rather than organic awareness, emotional affinity or loyalty. The assumption is that agentic AI will diminish the importance of brand equity. In this scenario, the brand that wins is simply the one that masters answer engine optimization (AEO) and generative engine optimization (GEO).

Our latest data tells a different story – or at least a more nuanced one. Globally, while 32% of consumers agree that they would be willing to buy a brand recommended by an AI assistant, even if they’d never heard of the brand before, 36% disagree. And majorities say there are some brands they would always be prepared to pay full price for – an attitude that’s particularly pronounced among Millennials (source: Foresight Factory, 2026).

Now what?

Don’t let AI optimization distract you from the continued importance of traditional brand investment. Brands must of course adapt to the world of agentic AI, but with costs spiraling, it’s important to monitor ROI on this investment. Meanwhile, if too much budget is redirected to AI at the expense of broader marketing, brand equity will suffer. Don’t underestimate the power of consumer advocacy, and make your brand one that customers won’t budge on.