Has Market-Driven Strategy in FMCG Been Fundamentally Flawed All Along?

For years, the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) industry has upheld one golden rule:

“Let the market lead. Build what the consumer says they want.”

Sounds logical, right?
But here’s the uncomfortable truth:

Many new product launches — especially in the beverage sector — still fail. Spectacularly.

Despite thorough consumer surveys, trend reports, and even good internal tasting results, the market often shrugs at these “data-driven” innovations.

So, the real question is:

Have we misunderstood what it actually means to be “market-driven”?

🚨 The Core Disconnect: Emotion vs. Science

Let’s break down how FMCG product development typically works:

Marketing gathers insights:
“Consumers want a healthy yet indulgent drink.”
“They’re into rituals, sensory experiences, and natural fruit flavors.”
Product R&D gets the brief:
Now they’re supposed to translate these vague phrases into concrete decisions —
What ingredients? What ratios? What processing techniques? What nutritional profile?

But here’s the catch:

All these so-called “insights” are based on emotional, subjective, and fuzzy language.
R&D, on the other hand, operates in a world of data, molecules, percentages, and chemical reactions.

We are using emotional inputs to guide scientific systems.

And that, right there, is the systemic mismatch.

🔍 Why “Market-Driven” Might Be a False Compass

The idea that “the market knows best” assumes one critical thing:
That consumers know how to accurately articulate what they want — in ways that are translatable to product formulation.

But:

“Refreshing” could mean lower sweetness. Or more citrus top notes. Or higher carbonation. Or simply good branding.
“Premium” could imply polyphenol content, packaging aesthetics, or subtle bitterness.

These are ambiguous labels that require semantic translation before any formulation can act on them.

And yet, most companies jump straight from “emotive insight” → “R&D brief”.

The result?

A product that technically fits the brief…
But emotionally misses the mark.

🔬 The Path Forward: Building the Missing Bridge

What if we stopped guessing?

What if we could:

Translate words like “light,” “natural,” or “luxurious” into quantifiable specs — Brix levels, aromatic compounds, mouthfeel indices.
Build a system where emotional preferences and ingredient-level data are mapped and modeled together.
Use AI and structured databases to bridge the gap between market language and formulation logic.

This isn’t science fiction. It’s entirely feasible today.
And it changes the game.

Instead of “market-driven” being a black box of assumptions, it becomes:

Consumer-led, but data-backed.
Emotionally aligned, yet scientifically sound.

🧭 Rethinking What “Market-Driven” Really Means

The old model said:

“Give them what they want.”

The new model says:

“Understand what they mean — and build what actually satisfies it.”

This shift isn’t just about tools. It’s about mindset.

The problem was never with being market-driven.
It’s that we were listening to the wrong layer of the market — emotional signals — without a way to decode them into action.

Now, we can.

And once we do, maybe we’ll finally stop launching products that sound good on slides — but fall flat on shelves.

SKS Nutrition