 |
|
|
|||||
Kraft Heinz is studying a potential spin off of a large chunk of its grocery business, including many Kraft products, into a new entity that could be valued at as much as $20 billion on its own, a source familiar with the matter said on Friday. However, the structure of the deal could change and there is no guarantee Kraft Heinz would move forward with any such deal, the source said. News of the potential move is the second effort this week by a storied U.S. company looking to shore up shareholder value as shoppers ditch their pricey products in an uncertain economy. Earlier this week, cereal maker WK Kellogg agreed to a $3.1 billion buyout deal from Italy’s Ferrero. The Wall Street Journal first reported the development earlier in the day. According to the report, a split, which would leave the company with products such as its namesake Heinz ketchup and Dijon mustard brand Grey Poupon, could be finalized in the coming weeks. “As announced in May, Kraft Heinz has been evaluating potential strategic transactions to unlock shareholder value,” a company spokesperson said. Its shares closed up 2.5%. The company currently has a market value of $31.33 billion. Kraft Heinz was formed in 2015 after Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway and Brazilian private equity firm 3G Capital combined the former Kraft Foods with H.J. Heinz, which they bought in 2013. But it has been a challenging investment for Berkshire. Inflationary pressures and a shift in focus toward fresher, less processed food have hurt demand for Kraft Heinz’s lunch combos and other products. It lowered annual forecasts and reported a dour quarter in April, hurt by muted consumer spending. Kraft Heinz also said last month it would stop the launch of new products with artificial colors in the U.S. after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. outlined plans to remove synthetic food dyes from the U.S. food supply to address chronic diseases and conditions. “KHC spinning off its grocery business echoes the 2023 Kellogg spinoff in which the company spun off its cereal business, which had been in volumetric decline for some time,” said Connor Rattigan, analyst at Consumer Edge. “As CPGs (consumer packaged goods makers) contend with both changing consumer preferences and a challenging consumer environment, other CPGs may look to M&A and or similar corporate actions to improve their category exposures and improve their top-line trajectory,” Rattigan said. Anuja Bharat Mistry, Juveria Tabassum, Abigail Summerville, and Neil J. Kanatt, Reuters
Category:
E-Commerce
KFC is calling Colonel Sanders back into service as the ailing restaurant brand navigates what it calls a Kentucky Fried comeback. On Monday, the fast-food restaurant chain kicked off a national television ad campaign featuring the return of Colonel Sanders that highlights the brands origin story in an attempt to lure back diners who have gravitated to the sectors largest players, Chick-fil-A and Restaurant Brands Popeyes, and smaller upstarts like Daves Hot Chicken. While those chains have reported steady sales growth, restaurant operator Yum Brands has reported KFCs U.S. sales have declined for five consecutive quarters. We kind of lost a bit of ground, says Catherine Tan-Gillespie, president of KFCs U.S. business, during an interview with Fast Company. This is about us getting back in the fight. KFCs positioning has gotten so wobbly that it was recently ousted from the top three largest chicken chains in the U.S. by sales by Raising Canes. Smaller chains like Slim Chickens and Daves Hot Chicken have been accelerating their new restaurant openings and have had more success with narrowly focused menus. Growth for Daves Hot Chicken became so appetizing that it recently secured a majority investment from private equity firm Roark Capital at a $1 billion valuation, even though the chain had just over 300 locations. Chicken is the worlds protein and its the only protein that can be eaten globally, says Fred LeFranc, founder and CEO at restaurant consulting firm Results Thru Strategy. But, its very, very competitive. Bones of contention As the legacy incumbent brand, KFC has struggled with a menu that tends to favor bone-in chicken, while much of the growth has been for boneless chicken in the forms of tenders, nuggets, and sandwiches. The quality of service at KFC isnt as well regarded as it is at rivals like Chick-fil-A, which puts a huge emphasis on friendliness from the staff, and the operating standards for stores has also been low. They let their stores get old and didnt refurbish them, adds LeFranc. Tan-Gillespie concedes that legacy brands like KFC sometimes do lose ground if they lose touch with where customers are evolving or where competitors are intensifying. [Photo: KFC] A 10-year veteran at KFC, including leadership roles in Canada and the South Pacific markets and serving as a chief marketing officer for the U.S. business, Tan-Gillespie was promoted to the role of president in April to steer a turnaround. For Yum Brands, it is key to get the chicken restaurant chain back on track to align more with the healthier sales results that have been reported by the operators other two big brands, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut. Her comeback plan for KFC includes retraining staff and a longer-term investment to renovate stores. KFC intends to use some corporate locations to experiment and evaluate what the restaurant concept of the future will look like. KFC is also giving a lot more attention to the food it serves, adding original recipe chicken tenders and a chicken-and-waffles combo to the menu. This week, KFC will add fried dill pickle slices, a trendy menu item thats also recently been featured at Popeyes and Shake Shack. The chain is also promoting a free bucket on us digital offer, available on KFC.com and the companys mobile app, which will give diners a free bucket of fried chicken for orders over $15. Famous mascot gets a fresh start As for the return of Colonel Sanders, in the past, KFC relied on a long-running gimmick of hiring big named celebrities to play the character, including Saturday Night Live alums Darrell Hammond and Norm Macdonald, actor Rob Lowe, and country singer Reba McEntire. Those advertisements were successful in breaking through culturally, but Tan-Gillespie says the latest campaign has a different goal of focusing more on the food and less on a casting gimmick. We didnt necessarily want a celebrity to detract from that story, says Tan-Gillespie. The newest ad does feature a celebrity component, with Canadian chef and The Bear actor Matty Matheson interacting with the Colonel in a few brief moments. KFCs campaign will also run on social media channels including TikTok and Instagram, as well as out-of-home advertising. It was developed by KFCs team with support from external partners including the creative agency Highdive, whose work in food includes campaigns for Mentos candy, Lays potato chips, and the sandwich restaurant chain Jersey Mikes Subs. Tan-Gillespie says all of the elements of the campaign reflect a dual approach that she calls sales overnight and brand over time. What that means is she hopes KFC can emotionally connect with diners with the return of a beloved brand mascot, while also driving more immediate sales with promotions and new menu items. The return of the Colonel, in many ways, equals the return of KFC, says Tan-Gillespie.
Category:
E-Commerce
As a leader in technology for nearly 30 years, I have observed waves of innovation disrupt the global business landscape and trigger major shifts in the way we work. Now, as AI takes its place as the next big thing, the global workforce is facing an overwhelming demand for new skills and capabilities. In my new book, Artificial Intelligence For Business, I highlight the impact of AI on the future of work, specifically the skills gaps and job displacements, as well as future essential skills required in global organizations. Interestingly, there is a cautious instinct at play, specifically for women at work, as they weigh the promise of innovation with the risks of AI application. This hesitation may be deterring women from using AI at work, as worries about embracing AI could undermine their credibility or even invite harsher judgement, instead of highlighting their true potential. According to recent research conducted by Harvard Business School Associate Professor Rembrand Koning, women are adopting AI tools at a 25% lower rate than men, on average. Synthesizing data from 18 studies that cover over 140,000 individuals worldwide, combined with estimates of the gender share of the hundreds of millions of users of popular generative AI platforms, the research demonstrates the gender gap holds across all regions, sectors, and occupations. Although the study highlights that closing this gap is crucial for business and economic growth, and development of AI-based technologies that avoid bias, the reasons for the gap existing in the first place needs to be explored further. Lets unpack several ethical, reputational, and systemic hurdles that may lead women to be more reluctant to use AI at work and explore how companies can help bridge this gap. Ethical concerns First, ethical concerns of AI adoption tend to weigh heavily on womens minds. Studies indicate that women consistently rate hesitation about AI technology adoption higher than men do, placing greater weight on ethics, transparency, accountability, explainability, and fairness when evaluating AI tools. In one study that examines public perceptions of AI fairness across three societal U.S.-based contexts, personal life, work life, and public life, women consistently perceived AI as less beneficial and more harmful across all contexts. This caution may be evident as women hold themselves, and their teams, to strong ethical standards. These concerns are amplified by the rapid increase in “black box” AI tools adoption across key business decision points, where the inner workings are opaque and hidden behind proprietary algorithms. As more female ethicists and policy experts enter the global field, they raise high-impact questions about bias, data privacy, and harmful consequences, feeling a special responsibility to get answers before signing off on innovative technology solutions. Women all over the world watched in dismay as leading AI ethicists were penalized for raising valid concerns over ethical development and use of AI. Famously, Timnit Gebru, co-lead of Googles Ethical AI team, was forced out after pushing back on orders to withdraw her paper on the social risks of large language models. Subsequently, Margaret Mitchell was also fired while standing in solidarity with Gebru and raising similar concerns. This move, among others, has sent a stark message that calling out potential harm in AI could make you a target. Extra scrutiny Alongside ethics, there is may be a fear of being judged at work for leaning on AI tools. In my experience, women often face extra scrutiny over their skills, capabilities, and technical prowess. There may be a deep-rooted concern that leveraging AI tools may be perceived as cutting corners or reflect poorly on the users skill level. That reputational risk may be magnified when flaws or issues in the AI outputs are attributed to the users lack of competence or expertise. Layer onto this a host of ongoing systemic challenges inherent in the business environment and AI tools that are implemented. For example, training data can under-represent the experiences of women in the workplace and reinforce the perception that AI products were not built for them. Nondiverse AI teams also pose as a deterrent, creating additional barriers to participate and engage. The consequence of the gender gap in AI is more than a discomfort. It can result in AI systems that reinforce gender stereotypes and ignore inequities, issues that are augmented when AI tools are applied for decision-making across essential areas such as hiring, performance reviews, and career development. For example, a recruitment tool trained on historical data may limit female candidates from leadership roles, not due to lack of capabilities, but because historically there have been more male leaders. Blind spots like these further deepen the very gap that organizations are trying to close. To counter this and encourage more women to use AI at work, organizations should start by creating an environment that balances guardrails with exploration. Additionally, they should build psychological safety by encouraging dialogue that gives space for concerns, challenges, and feedback, without fears of being penalized. Open and transparent communication addresses any expected fears and uncertainty that accompany AI use in the workplace. Build fail-safe sandbox environments for exploration, where the goal is to learn through trial and error and develop skills through experiential learning. Policy changes Changing policy and guidelines in the organization can prove effective in encouraging more women to use AI at work. Apart from clear guidelines around responsible AI use, policies specifically allowing the use of AI can help close the gap. In a study conducted by the Norwegian School of Economics (NHH), male students were less likely to view using AI as “cheating.” Additionally, when policies forbid the use of AI, male students tended to use it anyway, while women adhered to the policy. When a policy explicitly allowing the use of AI was put in place, over 80% of both men and women used it, suggesting that policies encouraging the use of AI can help trigger more women to use it. Crucially, organizations should make a proactive effort to bring in more women into the AI conversation at every level. Diverse perspectives can prove effective in catching blind spots, and this approach sends a powerful message that representation matters. When women see their peers proactively shaping AI application in a safe, fair, and impactful way, they will feel more confident in participating as well.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||