On Strategy Showcase

Episode: Revisiting Challenger Brand Theory with Hugh Derrick of Eat Big Fish
Host: Fergus O’Carroll
Guest: Hugh Derrick, Partner at Eat Big Fish
Date: February 16, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode features a deep-dive discussion on the enduring relevance and evolution of "Challenger Brand" theory with Hugh Derrick, a partner at the consultancy Eat Big Fish. Host Fergus O’Carroll and Derrick trace the origins of challenger thinking back to the seminal book Eating the Big Fish by Adam Morgan (1999), assess its application today, and debate the distinction between challenger, disruptor, and purpose-led brands.

The conversation illuminates how the core principles of being a challenger remain potent but now face challenges of definition, dilution, and execution in a crowded, fast-moving landscape. Key topics include the role of founder ideology, the impact of digital democratization, how scale brands maintain challenger status, and the place of “purpose” and effectiveness in contemporary strategy.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Origins & Nature of Challenger Brands

• Challenger theory as a business book, not just marketing:

  • Derrick views Eating the Big Fish primarily as a business book, not narrowly about marketing, emphasizing it was “one of the very first books that assimilated insights and ideas from brands and businesses that weren’t market leaders” [05:44].
  • Prior to the book, business education heavily focused on market leaders; challenger thinking pulled attention to those challenging orthodoxy.

• Culture vs. Tactics:

  • The challenger mindset “had to sort of permeate the entire organization right up to the C suite.” [07:32]
  • Early case studies often focused on founder-led businesses combining vision (“ideology”) and an acute sense of what was missing in their category.

• “Mini vs. Mighty” as archetype:

  • BMW’s relaunch of Mini in the U.S. exemplified challenger thinking by drawing on inspiration from outside the automotive category and embracing “David vs. Goliath” visibility [09:07].

Memorable Quote:

“Looking outside your category for inspiration is a real challenger behavior.” — Hugh Derrick [09:07]

2. Has the Definition of "Challenger" Changed?

• Explosion of self-described challengers:

  • Derrick notes, “The lexicon has expanded. Disruptors, startups, outsider brands... there are a very limited number of market leaders. Pretty much everybody else is a challenger at some level.” [12:10]
  • Social media and lower barriers to market entry have led to a “sea of sameness”—brands may be individually interesting, but collectively fall into similar tropes, especially visible in categories like indie cosmetics on Instagram.

• Core principles endure:

  • While many call themselves challengers, true challenger strategy still “holds true for us…those principles and ideologies…help those businesses stand out from the crowd.” [14:32]

Memorable Quote:

"So many more challengers, many more disruptors, many more businesses doing interesting things. But I think the challenger principles still hold true for us." — Hugh Derrick [14:41]

3. Can You Remain a Challenger at Scale?

• Scale challengers — not just "small and feisty":

  • Companies like Nike and Dove are cited as examples of brands that operate with a challenger mindset despite their size [15:16].
  • “The most interesting challengers are scale challengers... It’s about mindset... If you are a scale challenger, you not only have the ideology and the thinking, but you also have the math to continue to lead the category.” [15:16]

• Risk of complacency:

  • If legacy challengers “become protective… playing by the category rules rather than leading them, then you become the challenged again.” [16:12]

Memorable Quote:

“Nike for us is a challenger. Phil Knight famously said, we are the industry Goliath, but we only stay that way by acting and thinking like the industry David.” — Hugh Derrick [15:16]

4. Disruptors vs. Challengers

• Subtle, but real distinctions:
  • Disruptors: “A technical advantage at the heart… changing the value paradigm,” often rooted in technology (e.g., Airbnb as platform) [17:17].
  • Challengers: “Built on the rock of what is true about them as a business and the ideals that they have.”
  • “Challengers are about ideology, whereas I think disruptors are often about technology.” [18:59]

5. Embedding Challenger Culture in Larger Organizations

• Facilitation & ownership:

  • Eat Big Fish operates with high-level facilitated workshops to build “conviction and belief and ownership” in cross-functional teams, especially important in large incumbent organizations [19:31].

• Helping brands reconnect to their challenger DNA:

  • Many organizations lack a clear definition of what it means to be a challenger; Eat Big Fish helps re-discover and articulate that basis, often via the “lighthouse identity” metaphor [20:59].

Memorable Quote:

“The idea of a lighthouse is it's built on the rock of what is true and foundational about a brand… you project those beliefs really consistently and insistently and people navigate by those beliefs.” — Hugh Derrick [21:51]

6. “Purpose” – A Distraction or a Challenger Driver?

• The decade of purpose:

  • Derrick acknowledges the “Purpose” wave, noting overlap between challenger beliefs and authentic purpose [24:00] but wary of hollow purpose statements with no action:

    “If you don’t act on it, then candidly, it’s a document somewhere in a file.” [24:54]

• Skepticism about true consumer demand for purpose:

  • O’Carroll contends the push for purpose was founded on flawed research assumptions, suggesting many purchases are not purpose-motivated [25:15].

• Altitude of purpose:

  • “A chocolate bar isn’t going to change the world, but a chocolate bar can bring joy. So it’s understanding that altitude is important.” [27:10]

7. Is the “Challenger” Label Still Useful?

• Risk of dilution:
  • “Everybody calls themselves Challenger… by function of market position. I’m small, I’m going up against other people, I’m a challenger... That is a risk.” [28:14]
  • However, when properly explained, “the meaning of the approach is equally resonant… it’s still incredibly powerful.” [28:52]

8. New Battlegrounds for Challenger Brands

• Where would Eat Big Fish focus if launching today?
  • Previous battles: orthodoxy of following market leaders, over-focus on consumer research (e.g., Virgin doing what it wants rather than what research says).
  • Today’s challenges:
    • Content: over 50% is boring and has no impact – "cost of dull" [32:20]
    • Media: low attention and effectiveness in media buying (work with Karen Nelson Field)
    • Product & innovation: balancing novelty and familiarity, building great products
    • Commerce & experience: future battlegrounds will be how consumers buy and experiential branding [34:50]
    • Internal brand culture: strategy must be “social” and collaboratively built [35:39]

Memorable Quote:

“Great strategy is essentially social. You build it together.” — Hugh Derrick [35:44]

9. Tying Challenger Thinking to Effectiveness

• Connecting strategy and execution:
  • Recent work by Adam Morgan and partners gives evidence and rigor to how challenger principles translate into market effectiveness, closing the loop from “thought leadership” to measurable outputs [36:58].
  • Research demonstrates dull marketing has real economic costs, and that challenger approaches “break through this sea of sameness” [38:52].

Notable Quotes by Timestamp

• [09:07] “Looking outside your category for inspiration is a real challenger behavior.” — Hugh Derrick
• [14:41] “So many more challengers, many more disruptors, many more businesses doing interesting things. But I think the challenger principles still hold true for us.” — Hugh Derrick
• [15:16] “Nike for us is a challenger. Phil Knight famously said, we are the industry Goliath, but we only stay that way by acting and thinking like the industry David.” — Hugh Derrick
• [21:51] “The idea of a lighthouse is it's built on the rock of what is true and foundational about a brand… you project those beliefs really consistently and insistently and people navigate by those beliefs.” — Hugh Derrick
• [24:54] “If you don’t act on it [purpose], then candidly, it’s a document somewhere in a file.” — Hugh Derrick
• [27:10] “A chocolate bar isn’t going to change the world, but a chocolate bar can bring joy. So it’s understanding that altitude is important.” — Hugh Derrick
• [28:52] “The meaning of the approach is equally resonant. So that presents an interesting challenge for us as a company, which is getting that, that more nuanced message through that noise. But it hasn't led me to believe that it's not as powerful as it used to be.” — Hugh Derrick
• [32:20] “The system one work really showed that over 50% of what we consume is essentially boring. So that’s just extraordinary amount of communication that’s being put out there that that’s having no impact.” — Hugh Derrick
• [35:44] “Great strategy is essentially social. You build it together.” — Hugh Derrick

Key Segments & Timestamps

• Intro/Context & Challenger Branding Origins – [00:00–09:00]
• Evolving Definition & Market Dynamics – [12:10–14:59]
• Challenger at Scale & Maturity – [15:01–17:06]
• Challengers vs. Disruptors – [17:06–18:59]
• Cultural Integration within Large Organizations – [18:59–21:51]
• “Purpose” vs. Positioning – [23:21–27:35]
• Is Challenger Still a Resonant Label? – [27:35–29:55]
• Modern Battlegrounds: Content, Media, Commerce, Culture – [29:55–35:44]
• Effectiveness & Execution: Today’s Focus – [36:09–39:59]
• Closing – [39:59–40:41]

Closing Thought

Fergus O’Carroll closes by reflecting:

“I always worry that in our quest to find the next shiny thing that we tend to forget at the things that are really good. And I think that this whole Challenger principles focus... is really good. And I love that it’s been tied to effectiveness on the tail end.” [39:59]

This conversation articulates how Challenger Brand strategy persists as a rich, multidimensional approach—still relevant if organizations remain true to its principles, adapt to today’s context, and avoid the trap of “sea of sameness.” Both purpose and executional effectiveness are recast as necessary evolutions, not replacements, of the challenger spirit.